What types of Uboats?

[kurfürst]

Does anybody know if SH 5 has got the full range of German Uboat types as in SH 3 or is it just limited to the VII C?

Beste Grüße,

Kurfürst

[Mittelwaechter]

Type II, VII and IX - for the complete list we'll have to wait.

[TH0R]

I hope we'll get a proper Type VIIC early deck railing and acording conning tower this time...

In SHIII taking an VIIC with early conning tower looked just wrong. :damn:

[kurfürst]

I´ll be happy with a late-war version of the type IX C/40, including a "Schnelltauchback" and a correct "Schnorchel"!

[Jimbuna]

Far too early to tell don't you think.

[Hartmann]

The same subs of sh3 could be enough. :D

[Carotio]

The same subs of sh3 could be enough. :D

I disagree wholeheartedly :nope:
SH5 being a new version of the ATO, IMHO it should contain more types and versions than we saw earlier, and all technology should be present, correct and work properly... I expect nothing less... :yep:

[kurfürst]

I´m 100 percent with you, Carotio! :up:

Take the IX D2 model from SH IV Uboat Missions, for example. It´s a lot more detailed and closer to the real one than the model in SH III has ever been.
I expect that level of detail and historical correctness from SH V!

Kurfürst :salute:

[JScones]

At the least there should be no "slot" limit on the number of playable u-boats as there is with SH3. Sure, provide only the main ones with the game on release, but code it in a way that allows modellers here to add as many new u-boat types as they wish; it's been a stock feature of popular flight sims for many years.

[JU_88]

You know -We dont ACTUALLY even know for sure that its just Uboats yet, That's all that has been announced / released so far, but who knows what other cards they still keeping close to their chest?
Until they release more info, im keeping an open mind.

(edit - good point Jaeson ^^)

[Chaoic16]

I agree with what Ju_88 said above, its too early to tell if SH5 is limited to U boat only. I mean what if they also reveal an additional surprises where we can also operate other nation's submarine, such as USN, RN, IJN, or other nation's navy submarines. Lets see if they actually have a surprises for us when time come.

:up:


Chaoic out...

[Jimbuna]

It would also be one hell of a bonus if a few new types from other countries not previously seen in SH were introduced and were playable.

[Highbury]

Type II

I stopped reading there, all I need. I only use Type II's (well sometimes I stretch my legs in a luxuriously large VIIB).

[Wulfmann]

I want I want I want I want I want

We all want as much as we can dream

But, I want smooth game play, accurate interaction with the enemy and if I have to chose (If I have to!!) I refer fewer models down better.

I play SH3 and have for years in a Type VIIC. Yes i loved the XXI and have done a few IXC (am in a career right now where I switched to a IXC in December 41 and went through Pauchenschlag and am now mid 43 but that is unusual for me.

I am not suggesting but if all we got was an incredible VIIC i would be happy if the game was super in the many areas that have in the past been less than optimal.

Again-------------IMO

Wulfmann

[Deep Source]

I disagree wholeheartedly :nope:
SH5 being a new version of the ATO, IMHO it should contain more types and versions than we saw earlier, and all technology should be present, correct and work properly... I expect nothing less... :yep:

I expect the same. SH3 have varius uboat types (making all people happy). SH4 US side make the same, but UBM... God? Thanks for create modders!

All same Uboats of SH3 and technology. Is the minimun expect from SH5.

[fallenyggdrasil]

I´d really like to see the Type XXIII boats in SH V.

[Arclight]

I'm with Wulfmann, quality over quantity. :yep:

[Safe-Keeper]

Though this may not reflect the majority of posters here, I'd love to see a milk cow. It wouldn't be just another u-boat, but one that would open for a new type of gameplay, in which you set up shop in your assigned area, contacted u-boats and went to meet them, for then to sit like a sitting duck while resupplies were being taken care of.

Just II, VII, IX and a milk cow would be more than enough for me. Oh, and perhaps a "super sub" like the XXI or whatever it was called from SHIII.

[coronas]

At the least there should be no "slot" limit on the number of playable u-boats as there is with SH3. Sure, provide only the main ones with the game on release, but code it in a way that allows modellers here to add as many new u-boat types as they wish; it's been a stock feature of popular flight sims for many years.
I agree. Three or four well done boats are enought. Let modders work. :03:

[PL_Andrev]

Somebody of SH5 dev team told that allied subs will be available too.
But the question: what types of allied submarines?

This question will have answer in next week, after SH5 dev team / SUBSIM meeting.

:woot:

[tonschk]

I'm with Wulfmann, quality over quantity. :yep:


:yeah: I AGREE :yeah: ........ Quality over Quantity. :rock:




.

[Deep Source]

I agree. Three or four well done boats are enought. Let modders work. :03:

I agree, but only if UBI release a SDK for silent hunter. Come on, Silent Hunter is hard to modding models. I not expect a "total full realism" Uboats models, it the new first person view. My opinion: The same uboat types present on SH3 on SH5 do not is reason for poor quality. I wait 2011 for a product with good quality.

[Brag]

Knowing there are limitations in developing time, money, computer limitations, I would prefer one U-boat well done and a good, really good game to back it up.

Instead of two boats I'd prefer two cooks asking me about the soup :D

[oscar19681]

Knowing there are limitations in developing time, money, computer limitations, I would prefer one U-boat well done and a good, really good game to back it up.

Instead of two boats I'd prefer two cooks asking me about the soup :D

Or to be able give the cook a make extremely good soup ability

[Steeltrap]

Well I might be in the minority but, in a related point, I am one who doesn't care about the ability to walk through the entire sub.

Why?

For starters, what exactly does that add to gameplay? Does the skipper have to run to the engine room every time he wants to order a new speed? Does he go there when he wants damage control performed? No. Novelty effect once or twice; after that it's a yawn. If they build it so you HAVE to run around to get certain things done, that will quickly become a pain in the aft spaces....

How much development effort goes into the building of all spaces for all the subs? For me, I want every last $$ going to technical accuracy then graphics in those places that matter (external, through scope, through binocs) and LASTLY, if they have time, to worry about the interior outside the command room and conning tower.

Why does the matter for the number of subs? If you have to do the full interior for each, it follows that that takes considerably more development than would otherwise be the case.

[Kaleun_Endrass]

For me, I want every last $$ going to technical accuracy then graphics in those places that matter... Why does the matter for the number of subs?
I guess all the more boats are in the game at release all the more customers could be attracted. The number of players that want every vent to operate realistically is so small that the devs won´t or aren´t allowed to put effort into that.

PS: Im one of that minority.

[oscar19681]

Well I might be in the minority but, in a related point, I am one who doesn't care about the ability to walk through the entire sub.

Why?

For starters, what exactly does that add to gameplay? Does the skipper have to run to the engine room every time he wants to order a new speed? Does he go there when he wants damage control performed? No. Novelty effect once or twice; after that it's a yawn. If they build it so you HAVE to run around to get certain things done, that will quickly become a pain in the aft spaces....

How much development effort goes into the building of all spaces for all the subs? For me, I want every last $$ going to technical accuracy then graphics in those places that matter (external, through scope, through binocs) and LASTLY, if they have time, to worry about the interior outside the command room and conning tower.

Why does the matter for the number of subs? If you have to do the full interior for each, it follows that that takes considerably more development than would otherwise be the case.

I see what you mean and i,m sure you dont have to come out of the contol room most of the time. But i for one like to have the abilaty anyway. In sh3 you could go to the captains bunk in stuff where in sh5 i really felt boring because i could only go into the conning tower and control room. I guess in combat i will remain mostly in the control room but on long patrols just transiting i would like to have a stroll throught the whole lengt of the u-boat from time to time.

[Steeltrap]

I see what you mean and i,m sure you dont have to come out of the contol room most of the time. But i for one like to have the abilaty anyway. In sh3 you could go to the captains bunk in stuff where in sh5 i really felt boring because i could only go into the conning tower and control room. I guess in combat i will remain mostly in the control room but on long patrols just transiting i would like to have a stroll throught the whole lengt of the u-boat from time to time.

Don't get me wrong (not suggesting you are), I'd like to be able to walk through as well, and I can imagine it might lead to some interesting aspects of gameplay (for example, imagine you get a damage control benefit by going to the relevant compartment, but that doing so necessarily restricts some of your command options...interesting....).

What I don't want is technical accuracy being lost by too much time being spent on pretty graphics. That is a curse affecting many PC games these days.....

[subvers4]

I'm with Steeltrap here, the main reason for my love affair with SH3/GWX is down to the atmospheric gameplay which helps immersion hugely. The walking through the sub and being able to interact with some other characters, I feel, would be a novelty thing at first, but due to the constraints of being a computer sim, would become a repetitive exercise.
I would much rather the money,time and expertise to be spent on more imaginative and realistic AI behaviour. I don't want to feel I'm watching the same film over and over again with the same characterisations. The ability to have to come up with different plans and approaches to a given situation, and seeing the differing results, good or bad, that arise from your actions is what does it for me.
Just my tuppence worth.:up:

[iambecomelife]

What I don't want is technical accuracy being lost by too much time being spent on pretty graphics. That is a curse affecting many PC games these days.....

QFT

[Scottly]

I'd quite like to see some Italian boats, BETASOM had quite a few based in France. Even considering that they were pretty useless it'd be an interesting diversion.

On a slightly more likely note, I think a what-if scenario Type XI with the gun turrets would be fun.

[Snestorm]

A Type XI?
With gun turrets?
Huh?

[TarJak]

I'm with Jscones on having unlimited playable slots. The SH3 limit was just a damn nuisance.

[DarkFish]

I'm with Jscones on having unlimited playable slots. The SH3 limit was just a damn nuisance.This was already fixed in SH4:up:

[KeptinCranky]

The II VII and IX boats will definitely be in the game.. because well, you gotta have those...

The devs did ask us during the meet what we would like to see, a XXI a XXIII or something else entirely...

we couldn't agree on this subject at the meeting, but my view is that a XXIII boat is not all that fun to play, you have only 2 eels, the XVII while fun, was never operational, so not very interesting...

the XXI I wouldn't mind having back in the game, but I won't put my hopes on it, because that would entail a large amount of additional work for the devs, building a full interior for a XXI...:doh:

I wouldn't mind having one or 2 Italian sub classes in the game though :salute:

[Nuc]

The devs did ask us during the meet what we would like to see, a XXI a XXIII or something else entirely...


What else did they ask?

[KeptinCranky]

Ok, bear with me here,
First of all, anything I say here is NOT definitive, nor an indication of what may or may not be in the game.
I am not an Ubi dev, I don't influence their decisions. you'll just have to wait for them for definite answers :know:
the night before the actual presentation we had a sort of brainstorming session/discussion with Dan, Mike and Mihai about all sorts of aspects of the game. I was partly distracted during that because Dan had brought a book I was very interested in (sneaky :hmmm: ). Also after the presentation, and the day after that, some lively talks with the individual devs were surely had. I can only report on what I know of course.
also keep in mind that everyone present at the meet is an avid sub-simmer, we've all played sh3 and sh4 and often other sub-games as well. this means it's easy to forget that they want to sell the game not just to you, but if at all possible to your 12-year old relative/kid sister/whatever, and make them like it. a difficult mission by any standard.

Anyhow, we discussed things like what we want from a game in the way of simulation, what sort of problems crop up in building a Silent Hunter game. And also about what types of Uboots should be in the game. That the standard boats would be in was without question, but the discussion about prototypes like the type XXI was inconclusive, mostly because we went on to other things.

There was a discussion about expansions/other options such as Multiplayer and what possibilities that offers. Also about if and how something like destroyer command for SH2 could be implemented in sh5 and if such a thing would sell.

Now, keep in mind that if Dan & co. could call all the shots on what sh5 would become, and if they had an infinite budget, they'd pull all the stops and you'd get the ultimate Uboot simulation. You'd also get a 300 page manual with it, and you'd have to read it all before you could even contemplate going out on a feindfahrt. This of course is not the case. It couldn't be.

They've gone for an accessible game, and I applaud the way they've done it. :up: Do not fear that sh5 will become some sort of arcade sub-game, it will definitely be silent hunter as you know it. Only better.

I also had a talk with Mihai and some of the other guys about engines on uboats, specifically about implementing more detailed engine options such as running on e-motors on the surface, and why would this be necessary. also about using only one diesel because of damage/fuel/other reasons, and what this would mean for steering the boat, specifically how much would the rudder need to compensate for the fact that there's only one propeller turning. Now, Implementing something like ordering each engine separately would add a level of complexity to the game that is not necessarily a good thing. personally I'd love to have it but that doesn't mean it's feasible to put in. I think it may very well be, but that's not up to me of course.

Hope this satisfies your curiosity somewhat... I've gotta make dinner now...:salute:

[Snestorm]

Thank you, KeptinCranky.
This isn't the first time your posts have improved my day.

[martes86]

[...] also about using only one diesel because of damage/fuel/other reasons, and what this would mean for steering the boat, specifically how much would the rudder need to compensate for the fact that there's only one propeller turning. Now, Implementing something like ordering each engine separately would add a level of complexity to the game that is not necessarily a good thing. personally I'd love to have it but that doesn't mean it's feasible to put in.


I sent today a little PM to Mihai about a technical explanation I got regarding the matter from one of the folks from our Historic Services section. It still seemed complicated. Anyways, I haven't given up yet, there's some resourceful guys going into it, and if they send me any more worthy details about it, no doubt I'll send them to the Devs. :DL

[BellJack95]

I liked the old standards of Type II, VII and IX and never played much with the electric boats. So in reading the thread it seems SH5 should offer at least the same number as in SH3.

For the Type II in SH3 there was just two types modeled but you could select any of the Uboat numbers to assign. I guess it did not make sense to model all four types but for SH5 it would be nice to have all four more accurately protrayed.

For the Type VII I would like to visually see the differences between the Type VII B/C as compared to the Type VII C/41 modeled.

For the Type IX, I wonder if they will create the original Type IX to add to the mix or leave it as IXB, IXC, IXC/40, IXD.

[ivank]

Type II, Type VII, Type IX(all versions of them)

[Snestorm]

I'd like to backup BellJack95.
The addition of the original Type IX, and Type VII. Both being available at wars start.
Some may wish to hang me for this but, as a compensation, I care not whether the Type XXI and Type XXIII are included.

[evan82]

I hope we'll get a proper Type VIIC early deck railing and acording conning tower this time...

In SHIII taking an VIIC with early conning tower looked just wrong. :damn:

This is true. Also they should give for us a few railing schemes for each boat. Also we should be able to change railings, and netcutters when we want.:arrgh!:

[thehiredgun]

I would like to see the XXI. I like that sub alot. I play it in SH3. I hope they offer that sub.

[evan82]

I would like to see the XXI. I like that sub alot. I play it in SH3. I hope they offer that sub.

For many players this is not so important, but for me is. I also like XXI. And this time I would like to see XXI without bugs!:arrgh!:

I don't know files from SHV now, but after small changes XXI should be playable from 1939, at least I hope so. But if don't, then I also like VII:D

And what about interiors for II, IX, and XXI in SHV. Someone seen it?:hmmm:

[ivank]

I want a type X

[Grothesj2]

I'd like to see a type X. I could care less about a silly type XXI since they were not even used beyond one or two actual patrols.

[Carotio]

For many players this is not so important, but for me is. I also like XXI. And this time I would like to see XXI without bugs!:arrgh!:

And what about interiors for II, IX, and XXI in SHV. Someone seen it?:hmmm:

Well, as I wrote earlier in this thread, I expect and hope to have the same units as in SH3 and more variety and more detail. Though the XXI never made the difference in the war, since it came too late, having it as a bonus or reward for the last part of the war would really be a pity to throw away. I actually never made it to the end, cause I never finished a career, so I have only tried it in a single mission. It is cool, so I don't hope they skip it...

We saw the interiors of the VII and it looked good, but not for the other types.

[Fluffysheap]

I don't have much interest in the type-X because I don't see what would be fun about minelaying. I would nominate the type-XXIII, since (unlike the type XXI) it did make a significant number of patrols, but had most of the same technology. I suspect the devs chose the XXI instead of the XXIII for SH3 because the XXI has so many more torpedoes that it's more fun to play, whereas with the XXIII you have barely enough to sink one ship.