WOLF PACKS in SH5

[Uber Gruber]

On a ascending scale of 1 to 5 How important to you is it to have Wolf Packs in SH5 ?

[JU_88]

Its a no brainer innit, (for me at least)
Not to be negative - but if enough folks vote the 'i dont care' option this poll could potententially do more harm than good. :oops:

[Rapt0r56]

I choose 50/50 because Wolfpacks are an must have, but! i will buy and (enjoy) the Game too, as it comes with or not.

[oscar19681]

I voted I'm not sure i'd buy the game without them for lack of a better awnser. I would actually bu the game without it. But on the other hand we have been asking for it since sh-2

[dcb]

An absolute must! They defined the whole Atlantic campaign since early 1942 and would add immense value to the game.

[The General]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.

[GoldenRivet]

AI wolfpacks would add to the historical accuracy and realism of the game in the earlier war years. but after the passage of time, wolfpacks became almost non-existant.

I think it would be neat if it were included... but i disagree that the success of SHV depends on their inclusion. to me... its one of those things that would be cool... but not entirely necessary.

picture this...

you sight a convoy, and receive orders to hold fire for perhaps 3 or 4 days until other boats can join the fight.

i think a lot of average players wouldnt think that waiting game was a lot of fun.

[Onkel Neal]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.



I'm curious, how did you establish that fact?

I'm betting AI wolfpacks put no more of a drain on the computer than AI ships in a convoy.

Wolfpacks: Absolute must.

[JU_88]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.

No that is not a 'fact' not even in the slightest, sorry 'General' but I'm afraid I have to say that i find your statement utterly absurd.:oops:
This 'fact' is based on what exactly? :06:

[karamazovnew]

A must, but I voted for 50/50... I'd really like to have them but I'll buy the game even if the devs decide against them.

[Jimbuna]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.

An absolute must (Wolfpacks).....plus diving and torpedo firing AI subs for good measure.

Now if I were a gambling man :hmmm:

[GoldenRivet]

diving and torpedo firing AI subs is a must.

as are torpedo launching torpedo boats... they have had a number of wasted opportunities against me. ;)

[JU_88]

as are torpedo launching torpedo boats... they have had a number of wasted opportunities against me. ;)

hell yes :yep:

[COLEY]

AI wolfpacks would add to the historical accuracy and realism of the game in the earlier war years. but after the passage of time, wolfpacks became almost non-existant.

I think it would be neat if it were included... but i disagree that the success of SHV depends on their inclusion. to me... its one of those things that would be cool... but not entirely necessary.

picture this...

you sight a convoy, and receive orders to hold fire for perhaps 3 or 4 days until other boats can join the fight.

i think a lot of average players wouldnt think that waiting game was a lot of fun.

absolutely....but think how much more fun it would be when you do finally get the nod to go in.....:salute:

[Jimbuna]

diving and torpedo firing AI subs is a must.

as are torpedo launching torpedo boats... they have had a number of wasted opportunities against me. ;)

This small pond they call the Atlantic looks like it's going to be a hornets nest at this rate. :o

:03:

[GoldenRivet]

This small pond they call the Atlantic looks like it's going to be a hornets nest at this rate. :o

:03:

LOL Yeah.

i remember being a rookie kaleun when SH3 was not 1 week old on my hard drive.

i was cruising on the surface in poor visibility... still wind and sea with light rain.

out of nowhere off the port side comes an elco with guns blazing.

i knew it was a torpedo boat... and i expected the bastard to put an eel right into my belly... and i was astounded that he never launced a single torpedo.

it was then that i discovered the disappointing news that torpedo boats dont launch torpedoes.

thats like having a battleship in a game that cant use its big guns... or having a race car in a game that only goes 55 mph

[mookiemookie]

A must. I would be very very disappointed if wolfpacks were overlooked despite overwhelming community desire for them, again.

[Jimbuna]

LOL Yeah.

i remember being a rookie kaleun when SH3 was not 1 week old on my hard drive.

i was cruising on the surface in poor visibility... still wind and sea with light rain.

out of nowhere off the port side comes an elco with guns blazing.

i knew it was a torpedo boat... and i expected the bastard to put an eel right into my belly... and i was astounded that he never launced a single torpedo.

it was then that i discovered the disappointing news that torpedo boats dont launch torpedoes.

thats like having a battleship in a game that cant use its big guns... or having a race car in a game that only goes 55 mph

Rgr that....let's hope we end up with a few pleasant suprises :03:

[kemeri]

I think that the question is MUCH deeper than just a Wolfpacks:
the main reason (IMHO) of wolfpacks absence is the AI limitations, which is really hard to be eliminated without total AI upgrade.
Just remember the "Convoy attack" tutorial from SH3, when your boat becomes the "enemy" only after attack initiating, before the attack - it is a "friend", also after occasional hits convoy destroyers begin shoot each other. AI structure had been chosen so that "friend or foe" determining was not necessary: for the enemy shipping any u-boat (yours one) always is the "enemy". Because of that I suggest there were no other subs in the world of SH3, or may be visa versa: as there are no other subs, the AI have been simplified.

So (IMHO again) Wolfpacks are the second question. The first one is the AI, which can manage subs. The AI in SH3,4 is not bad, i would say, that it is very very good for the model chosen, but it is not able to provide more then one sub simulation.

I consider that just improving the existing AI for proper many subs simulation is near impossible, not only because of MUCH greater number of conditions it should take into the account, but also MUCH greater number of units it should manage.

May be "double-layered' AI could help: each unit has its own, 1st layer AI, which gathering information for the unit, checking unit status and taking some dcision for the unit; and the 2nd layer AI, like a "god's eye" over the SH5 world, which is checking and correcting 1st-layer AIs taken decisions, providing them with the information e.t.c., and is controlling all the simulation process. It's like a man, which plays chess with himself, where pawns has their own mind and one of them is the player sub.

Hope the devs will have the TIME and intention to solve AI, Wolpacks problem somehow.

I want Wolfpacks! :DL

[The General]

I'm curious, how did you establish that fact?

I'm betting AI wolfpacks put no more of a drain on the computer than AI ships in a convoy.

Wolfpacks: Absolute must.

No that is not a 'fact' not even in the slightest, sorry 'General' but I'm afraid I have to say that i find your statement utterly absurd.:oops:
This 'fact' is based on what exactly? :06:

An absolute must (Wolfpacks).....plus diving and torpedo firing AI subs for good measure.

Now if I were a gambling man :hmmm:Well, as long as you guys (and you're respective wives/girlfriends) are happy forking out for a prohibitively expensive new rig, that'll actually run the fantastical subsim you have in your heads, then I guess you're right, it is a possiblitly to have all you want in SH5 :03:

[GoldenRivet]

... General.

with due respect.

please explain to me why you think it would be such a performance killer?

we have numerous situations and missions in SH3 and 4 during which there are massive engagements of various ships with and without convoys sometimes upwards of 50 ships in game at any given time.

during these events in and out of the campaign - my computer performance has not seen any degradation whatsoever when i keep things under about 32x time compression in rendering range of these massive convoys and ships.

furthermore... while playing games like IL2 with airplanes buzzing everywhere, or Microsoft flight simulator X with AI traffic set to 100% in dense scenery i see virtually no performance degradation.

i think it is a safe conclusion that adding 3 to 5 AI u-boats in occasional convoy attacks would not notably affect system performance.

the thing that got most folks riled up about your post earlier is the use of the word "Fact".

how can you deduce "facts" in relation to a game that has not even been released yet... nor have any details about the game, its performance, performance options etc yet been released?

in conclusion - i think it is to early to say... whether or not wolfpacks will even be included in the final build amd how those wolfpacks might affect system performance with any degree of certainty.

[HanSolo78]

Absolute a MUST HAVE!
I won´t buy it without... causual playability and the superficial features graphics and some more life on the sub are too few good cases for a Sh3 successor! :|\\ In that case I will have a sticky with my own mod for which I can create several things because mod tools are already invented by some great people like swkas.

And I think most of the subsim community and SH3 fans who will be potential buyers have the same opinion.

[Sailor Steve]

I voted 50/50. I'd love to see them but it's never been a major point for me. I just like the submarines.

Its a no brainer innit, (for me at least)
Not to be negative - but if enough folks vote the 'i dont care' option this poll could potententially do more harm than good. :oops:
On the other hand if the vast majority said they didn't care (which isn't likely to happen) then the harm would only be to the few. But that's just philosophy, and my rambling thoughts. Didn't mean anything by them.:sunny:

[Fluffysheap]

I put 50/50, but I would much rather have them than not; it's just that it won't keep me from buying the game if they aren't there, so I cannot put any of the two higher options :)

[JU_88]

Well, as long as you guys (and you're respective wives/girlfriends) are happy forking out for a prohibitively expensive new rig, that'll actually run the fantastical subsim you have in your heads, then I guess you're right, it is a possiblitly to have all you want in SH5 :03:


General, the bottom line is this.
Wolfpacks and AI subs will not hurt performance heres why...


Point 1 the AI
An Ai script is bascially a text file that uses a tiny amount
of processing recources to run within a program.

1) Ai scripts for aircraft and escorts dont kill your fps, so why would AI scipts for subs do it?

2) Think of a game where You have serveral AI Team mates, maybe a squad based first person shooter or an RTS.
Do they always run badly? Nope! And for the record having AI Uboats is the EXACT same thing.

3) Take a more complex game world like 'Arma II' or GTAIV those have MANY MANY more AI bots in a single scene than Silent hunter, does it grind to halt when there is alot of action?
NOPE!

Point 2, 3D Models and texture files.

3D Ship and aircraft models do not kill your fps unless in VERY LARGE numbers. Poly counts and texture resolutions are kept to reasonable amount/size, so they can be rendered realtime without draining your GPU and VRAM.

1) Think of muti-player Sh3, did having 4 human controlled subs in on the action slow you comp down? No it did not.

2) In modded SH3 Did the AI sub models in port slow your comp down- humm again ....nope.

So throwing a half a dozen or so AI uboats in to a convoy battle, will not slow down your system. It really does nothing! its no different than throwing a squadron of 12 bombers at the convoy.

So can you please either:
present your theory with some kind of reasoning to back it up - or kindly drop the subject?
Thank you sir.

[THE_MASK]

I will probably get shot down but i would rather see all the time spent on releasing a realistic bug free game first without wolfpacks. Then if sh5 sells well they should have to give us an expansion with wolfpacks and spend lots of time getting it right because i would say that silent hunter series is very complicated game to make .

[JU_88]

I will probably get shot down but i would rather see all the time spent on releasing a realistic bug free game first without wolfpacks. Then if sh5 sells well they should have to give us an expansion with wolfpacks and spend lots of time getting it right because i would say that silent hunter series is very complicated game to make .


I cant vouch for bug free, (there will be some bugs eitherway)
but in terms of realism, Wolfpacks are pretty large part of that :salute:
To be fair I'd expect okayish AI subs in Stock SH5, but sure - I could live with proper wolfpacks in an expansion if worse came to worst.

[The General]

@JU 88

Q: How do you programme the enemy A.I. to attack the A.I. subs in the Pack in a realistic fashion and not focus all their attention on you?

A: You can't.

Q: Who gave you the authority to tell me what I could and could not post?

A: Nobody.

[GoldenRivet]

@JU 88

Q: How do you programme the enemy A.I. to attack the A.I. subs in the Pack in a realistic fashion and not focus all their attention on you?

program them to attack the closest detected submerged contact, OR in some cases... the loudest submerged contact... this will not always be your boat.

im no programmer but im sure you could program that with a few basic lines of code added to the current files.

[Jimbuna]

General, the bottom line is this.
Wolfpacks and AI subs will not hurt performance heres why...


Point 1 the AI
An Ai script is bascially a text file that uses a tiny amount
of processing recources to run within a program.

1) Ai scripts for aircraft and escorts dont kill your fps, so why would AI scipts for subs do it?

2) Think of a game where You have serveral AI Team mates, maybe a squad based first person shooter or an RTS.
Do they always run badly? Nope! And for the record having AI Uboats is the EXACT same thing.

3) Take a more complex game world like 'Arma II' or GTAIV those have MANY MANY more AI bots in a single scene than Silent hunter, does it grind to halt when there is alot of action?
NOPE!

Point 2, 3D Models and texture files.

3D Ship and aircraft models do not kill your fps unless in VERY LARGE numbers. Poly counts and texture resolutions are kept to reasonable amount/size, so they can be rendered realtime without draining your GPU and VRAM.

1) Think of muti-player Sh3, did having 4 human controlled subs in on the action slow you comp down? No it did not.

2) In modded SH3 Did the AI sub models in port slow your comp down- humm again ....nope.

So throwing a half a dozen or so AI uboats in to a convoy battle, will not slow down your system. It really does nothing! its no different than throwing a squadron of 12 bombers at the convoy.

So can you please either:
present your theory with some kind of reasoning to back it up - or kindly drop the subject?
Thank you sir.

Keep a cool head mate.....better to have done than to wish it were so.

Spectemur Agendo http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[Seeadler]

furthermore... while playing games like IL2 with airplanes buzzing everywhere, or Microsoft flight simulator X with AI traffic set to 100% in dense scenery i see virtually no performance degradation.
...
i think it is a safe conclusion that adding 3 to 5 AI u-boats in occasional convoy attacks would not notably affect system performance.
full agree!

I have installed a few days ago the latest version of the Freespace2 Source Project, a space sim/shooter based on the open source of Freespace2 (released 1999). In 1999, on PC's systems most gamers would laugh about, fighting task groups similar to wolfpacks are already in this game and with a genius AI that time. Today for the actual version this AI is further improved by the community developers of the project, your group of space ships fighting together agains large enemy groups. Every one can take an insight of this AI routines because the full C++ sourcecode is available via SVN.

For AI routines like this, it makes no real difference whether they are control models of spaceships in a 3D space environment or models of submarines in a 3D ocean environment.

[JU_88]

@JU 88

Q: How do you programme the enemy A.I. to attack the A.I. subs in the Pack in a realistic fashion and not focus all their attention on you?

A: You can't.


The same way you program the AI to attack AI ships or aircraft in a realistic fashion and not always focus on you. :doh:

It will simply attack what every it sees/ detects first, tis the same for every game where you are not the only target.
Try it the mission editor and you'll see what I mean :03:


Q: Who gave you the authority to tell me what I could and could not post?

A: Nobody.

Correct, Sorry :oops: I was just wanted to hear your take on it. sorry if I sounded like a git.

[Hartmann]

Wolfpacks are not difficult to implement.

I remember sh1 and aces of the deep with IA submarines, including an old abandonware game with IA submarines, and only 500 k of size, so it´s not true that it can be difficult or impossible to implement.( wolfpack from novalogic).
Also a lot of flight sims have IA planes that reacts to enemy units in a 3d enviroment.

I think that is a must have in a atlantic war sim, the sensation of be in a full campaign with other friendly units around making contacts, attacking and other operations and radio messages

It´s the equivalent of fly a combat flight sim without friendly planes and no wingman, flying alone against the enemy planes.:o

Another thing is if they don´t have enough money/time to expend implementing this because the other modifications of sh3/sh4 engine consumes a lot of resources and work ( full interior) but at least i hope they could make possible this with IA controllers for no player boats.

[Payoff]

I voted 50/50. As for AI subs, I think it would be far more exciting to be stalked or have chance encounters with British or other allied subs which have the ability to kill you at sea. With regard to wolfpacks, I would be pleased with more dynamic radio interaction & an occasional hit on a convoy I am attacking by a simulated u-boat (which has been mentioned before). Maybe to allow me to thread my way through the escort screen, but I dont feel the need to grab the Freecam and go to 150m to watch a fellow u-boat get depth charged.

just my two cents

Payoff

[nikimcbee]

If wolfpack could do it waaaaay back then, I don't see why they couldn't do it now?

[nikimcbee]

If wolfpack could do it waaaaay back then, I don't see why they couldn't do it now?


what's wolfpack?
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=1176441#post1176441

:salute:

[V.C. Sniper]

Must be in

[FIREWALL]

Is there a post anywhere on the internet by UBI devs or UBI that definatly says ... No Wolfpacks ?

Produce it.

[mookiemookie]

Is there a post anywhere on the internet by UBI devs or UBI that definatly says ... No Wolfpacks ?

Produce it.

I think everyone's getting uppity because of Neal's report from the Europe meet that said that wolfpacks are not a certainty.

[FIREWALL]

I think everyone's getting uppity because of Neal's report from the Europe meet that said that wolfpacks are not a certainty.

:up: Mookie But if they don't say yay or nay it's a real suspense builder. :DL

[nikimcbee]

I think everyone's getting uppity because of Neal's report from the Europe meet that said that wolfpacks are not a certainty.
If that's the case, I wonder what the problem/holdup is?:hmmm:

[dcb]

If that's the case, I wonder what the problem/holdup is?:hmmm:

I'd bet it's programming a new submarine AI smart enough to look realistic to us, old subsimmers, and to integrate it into the game engine. This is more than just scripting some new ships or missions, it is deeply embedded in the engine code. Hard, indeed, but still an absolute must.

[Grothesj2]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.
Untrue. IL-2 can have hoardes of AI planes flying around, doing complex manuevers, shooting, bombing targets with little impact on most computers. Slow moving ship action should be far far less resource intensive.

[The General]

Hahaha! I love stirring the pot!!!!

:D

[Snestorm]

I side with payoff. More radio interaction from BDU on convoy contacts would be fantastic.
That would be suffuciant enough for me to simulate a wolfpack. Perhaps the sound of depth charges in the distance, but anything beyond that would merely be a sideshow. Radio interaction and perhaps a third numerical digit in the contact reports. No need to change the grid chart for that.

[JScones]

Its a no brainer innit, (for me at least)
Not to be negative - but if enough folks vote the 'i dont care' option this poll could potententially do more harm than good. :oops:
Only to those that voted "Absolute must"...remember, we all have our own opinion and forcing yours on to others isn't very social. ;)

FWIW I voted "50/50". And I fail to see the harm to my game if I don't get them. Indeed, I will see MUCH harm though if I get them poorly implemented, half implemented, inaccurately implemented or so on...

[karamazovnew]

More radio interaction from BDU on convoy contacts would be fantastic.
That would be suffuciant enough for me to simulate a wolfpack. Perhaps the sound of depth charges in the distance, but anything beyond that would merely be a sideshow.

Exactly. Maybe that's where the problem lies: BdU. In SH3 we really felt alone. Because of that, the enemy felt like the alien ships in Alien Invader, generic. And our actions seemed useless not because we didn't change the course of the war, but because there was nothing in the game to care about our victories. From everything I've read, wolfpacks=radio+bdu. Since both radio and bdu were missing in SH3, no wonder we're crying for wolfpacks :haha:.

Modelling the entire strata of BdU operations might be a bit more proc intensive, but considering that they only used information from radio messages from planes, ships and boats (all implemented) it shouldn't be a problem to implement a good (deffinitly better than nothing) BdU.

But I still feel that some think that real wolpacks were like the X-Wing formations attacking the Death Star, the panzer formations, or like the teams in multiplayer SH3.

[JU_88]

Hahaha! I love stirring the pot!!!!

:D

LOL, Once again General - i was out of line, for which I apologise :oops:

Only to those that voted "Absolute must"...remember, we all have our own opinion and forcing yours on to others isn't very social. ;)

FWIW I voted "50/50". And I fail to see the harm to my game if I don't get them. Indeed, I will see MUCH harm though if I get them poorly implemented, half implemented, inaccurately implemented or so on...

Your quite right JS, i get toooo fanatical/protective/carried away over the subject of Wolfpacks. i do need to chill. :up:

[JScones]

There is nothing wrong with being passionate though, JU.

[Uber Gruber]

@JSCONES

I'm not sure why people who voted "An Absolute Must" are "forcing their oppinions on others".....I thought they were just expressing their oppinion, as is the purpose of a Poll if i'm not mistaken.

@ALL

The goal of this poll is to gauge how much you, as a community, want Wolf Packs. Let the votes speak for themselves.

[The General]

It's ok JU_88, I love the Silent Hunter series too and know nothing about programming or wether or not Wolfpacks will be included (I hope so). During these lulls betweeen releases I just like to muck about. Neal told me off during The Great Post-Sh3/Pre-SH4 Lull of '07 when I was upset Kpt. Lehmann.

Have you played IL-2 Stormovik on the PS3? It's superb!

[U2222]

Does anybody have a feel for how they would like to interact with these wolfpacks?
Similar to multiplayer?
Limited to radio orders from Bdu?
Or something else:hmmm:

[mookiemookie]

Does anybody have a feel for how they would like to interact with these wolfpacks?
Similar to multiplayer?
Limited to radio orders from Bdu?
Or something else:hmmm:
Just like real life...orders from BdU to shadow a convoy until other u-boats are in position, then orders to attack.

[JU_88]

@JSCONES]
I'm not sure why people who voted "An Absolute Must" are "forcing their oppinions on others".....I thought they were just expressing their oppinion, as is the purpose of a Poll if i'm not mistaken.

@ Gruber: I am the guilty one :haha: I think Scones was refering to my post Lol, :D (see where he quoted me)

[Uber Gruber]

Ooops....:oops: Sorry :rotfl2:

[Scharnhorst1943]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.

There are ways around that, like what the old AOTD did.

It is possible to have U-Boats spawn near the convoy and attack if you shadow it for X hours. The longer you shadow, the more U-Boats spawn to attack the convoy ... (Up to a limit of course)

You could also have is set up so that if you get a set distance away from the spawned U-Boat it dissapears ...

It is possible to do without necessarily stopping frame rates

[FIREWALL]

Just like real life...orders from BdU to shadow a convoy until other u-boats are in position, then orders to attack.

I like that Mookie. :up:

As JsCones posted... If poorly implemented. At least they might be modded then at least. Something for our modders to work with.

I don't understand all the Hoopla.

[Annatar]

I mentioned it in an earlier thread, but if it doesn't have Wolfpacks it's not a buy for me.

Maybe, maybe I'd pick it up a year down the line once the modders have had a chance to get to grips with it, but I won't pay full price on day one for a retread of SH3 and 4 with some glitter on top. Make some real advances in the simulation or stop wasting everybody's time.

[FIREWALL]

I mentioned it in an earlier thread, but if it doesn't have Wolfpacks it's not a buy for me.

Maybe, maybe I'd pick it up a year down the line once the modders have had a chance to get to grips with it, but I won't pay full price on day one for a retread of SH3 and 4 with some glitter on top. Make some real advances in the simulation or stop wasting everybody's time.


:nope: :nope: :nope:

[JU_88]

I mentioned it in an earlier thread, but if it doesn't have Wolfpacks it's not a buy for me.

Maybe, maybe I'd pick it up a year down the line once the modders have had a chance to get to grips with it, but I won't pay full price on day one for a retread of SH3 and 4 with some glitter on top. Make some real advances in the simulation or stop wasting everybody's time.

:down::down:

[FIREWALL]

:down::down:


It's called a Mooch. :yep:

[JU_88]

you know after SHV is released there will be at least one post that goes something like this.....


"Dear sirs!

After purchasing SHV i must say that.. rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblrabblerabblerabblerab blerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabbl erabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bble EXTREMLY DISSAPOINTED...rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabbl e.

rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabb lerabble
rabblerabble.....took me 3 weeks to convert the DVD on to 40,000,000 tape cassettes...rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabb lerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble.....and it Still wouldnt run on my Acorn Electron.....

So then I .... rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble....contacted ubisoft tech support 2000 times and they still wont fix my driver problems!....rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabbler abblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble.

Then Finally..... rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble.... And to my utmost horror, the sea didnt match the colour of my eyes!....rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabbl erabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabble
....and then my face melted.

rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblera bblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabblerabb lerabble
...a good mind to take legal action ....rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblrabblerabblerabbl erabblerabblrabblerabblerabblerabblerabblrabblerab blerabblerabblerabbl
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblrabblerabblerabblerab blerabbl
rabblerabblerabblerabblerabblrabblerabblerabblerab blerabbl NEVER BUYING ANOTHER UBISOFT PRODUCT AGAIN!!! rabblerabblerabblerabblerabbl until next week!

:damn::damn:

Your sincerly
rabblerabble



:D

[KeptinCranky]

:har:

not enough spelling errors or leetspeak in that though :haha:

[DarkFish]

:har:

not enough spelling errors or leetspeak in that though :haha:this any better?:D



"YO MEN

I BoUaghT SH% [...] iT so TOtaly SUX U KNO [...]

[...] toOk me 4000000 tROJAns B4 I fINd a toRRENT wHO WORKS [...]

aND NOW he SAys i CANT DO multiplAYER COS i haV no legLA VERsipn :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

WHen I caLL UBI [...] TELL ME tehy not HElp me [...]

NOw iT WORX BUT TEH sEe is BAD COLOR!!!!!!!:down::down::down::down: [...]

[...] i GONNA TOLK 2 My dAd who is LOyer ANd HE WIll [...]

UBI SuX AND I NeveR BUY agaIN FRom TEHM!!!!!!!!!!:nope::nope::nope::nope::nope:"

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I iz goina pwn3d all u n00bz wit my lazer torpedoz!:o

All ur modz are belong to us! :p2:

cul8erz loozers!

:haha:

[martes86]

While I think that everything that there is to add would make for some nice features, we all know the infinite limitations the devs have in all fields, and for me, this particular feature is not so much of a priority, I have other things in mind, so I'd say to add it if there's time to spare, since, as it has been pointed out, there were no wolfpacks in the late war while other stuff was actually present all the time and are also good candidates for implementation requests.


Cheers

[FIREWALL]

As I've posted here and on other threads.

It hasn't been confirmed by UBI Devs or Ubisoft that there WON'T be Wolfpacks.

And... if it isn't the Devs, might be able to make it so it isn't a HardCode issue so our modders can deal with it.

So far nobody in their infinite wisdom has thought of that and posted but me. :smug:

[Annatar]

Oh dear how dare I have an opinion. Screw that Annatar, how dare that jerkoff not buy a game. The cheek of it.

[karamazovnew]

this any better?:D


I've just finished watching Braveheart AGAIN, so how about this?

A scotsman (a late 13'th century fairy tale one) writes to UBI support:
Listen lads... Me waif a'gonna drop da stone on me arse. Ya see, me dog is a worthless s#%t he is. Me flock, oi raised them well with me stick. Oi think me dog he needs some trainin'. A wolf pack is just wha' he needs. Oi tewk me chance and gun ta da y'olde shoop ta bay tha bloomin Soilent Honter wolfpack. I got back ta me lodge, cracked da crate open and, ia ain't gonna believe yer ears lads, there were this circle thing like of metal. Broke it with me teeth. No where's da ****an Yuu-bot?

Ubi tells him that the game must be played on a PC.
What da ya mean I gotta go bay a Pissy?! Listan ta me ya #%@@!#'s, me collie don't take fancy to ya !@$%!ng kitten.

Ubi explains what a PC is.
Lisan to me, and lisan ta me good. When I bought me waif, preety lass and all, da first thing she told me was "Angas, oi fancy ya, but if ya ever boy some, ya boy for me cookin' or for me looks. Ya boy nothin' else or ya'll feel da back of me hand Angas, by god ya will." Well, oi went ta da shop and oi bought da "PC". Got back to me lodge, put da circle in, wooped some brit boats with me eels. But where's da blooman woolfpack?!!

Ubi explains there are no wolfpacks in SH5
Curse ya... and curse ya good lads... Ya goona feel the wrath of a scot. Ya'll see.

Conlcusion:
In the year of our lord 20, 10, Angus Scott, drunk and outnumbered, charged the fields of Bucharest. He fought like warrior poets, he fought like scotsmen, and won his wolfpack. :up:

[FIREWALL]

Oh dear how dare I have an opinion. Screw that Annatar, how dare that jerkoff not buy a game. The cheek of it.

Then why are you here ?

You yourself state you'll wait until it cheap in a bargain bin while not, supporting a niche Sim that may or not continue because of initatial sales.

Then you further state you'll then suck up the freebie mods from our modders who paid full price for SH5 to bring us mods quickly.

Yeh. :yep: I call you a Mooch. And a Cheap one too ! :O:

[TDK1044]

Because Wolf packs have clearly not been part of the Devs focus in building SHV, I would rather that they simply lay a foundation for a Wolfpack Add On at a later time.

That way, instead of having a limited Wolf Pack interaction with the stock game, we could patch and mod SHV and then have a real Wolf Pack Add On a year down the line. :)

[Sailor Steve]

Oh dear how dare I have an opinion. Screw that Annatar, how dare that jerkoff not buy a game. The cheek of it.
I fully support your opinion and your right to state it, even though mine is different.

I also support others' right to their opinion, whether I agree or not, as well as their right to disagree using humor. A little nose-tweak won't hurt either of us.

But then, I support FIREWALL's right to...well, to be FIREWALL.:rotfl2:

[mookiemookie]

Because Wolf packs have clearly not been part of the Devs focus in building SHV, I would rather that they simply lay a foundation for a Wolfpack Add On at a later time.

That way, instead of having a limited Wolf Pack interaction with the stock game, we could patch and mod SHV and then have a real Wolf Pack Add On a year down the line. :)

If that's what it takes, I'd support this idea. I'd love to have it from day one, but this is the next best option.

[SteamWake]

Because Wolf packs have clearly not been part of the Devs focus in building SHV,

Where did this come from... just wondering.

I though it had not been confirmed nor denied.

[TDK1044]

My understanding is that they haven't really decided what to do regarding Wolf Packs, or to what degree, if any, they will feature in the game.

That being the case, rather than having some rushed attempt over the next three or four months at including Wolf Packs for the game's release, why not take their time and create an Add On just like they did for U Boats in SHIV?

[Jimbuna]

Whilst appreciating everyones right to an opinion......I think the devs now realise the needs/wishes of a fair number of sub simmers to want/require wolfpacks from day one of release.

If it is doable I'm hopeful and confident they will be included.

[dcb]

Because Wolf packs have clearly not been part of the Devs focus in building SHV, I would rather that they simply lay a foundation for a Wolfpack Add On at a later time.

And what if this intended add-on will never materialize, due to Ubi switching priorities and the team being reassigned to another project?:hmmm:
In Romania, we have a saying which, translated, would be something like: "Don't give the sparrow in your hand for the crow on the fence." It means: "Don't give away something small within reach for something big, but out of reach..."
So if the devs have time to implement even a half-baked engine for Wolfpacks, I'd say it would be better than not having it at all and wait for it to be implemented in an uncertain future. Just my 2 cents.

[SubV]

So if the devs have time to implement even a half-baked engine for Wolfpacks, I'd say it would be better than not having it at all and wait for it to be implemented in an uncertain future. Just my 2 cents.
:up:

[HanSolo78]

:up:

I agree with that too!! :rock:

Even if it would be implemented half the way we modders could maybe use it.

[TDK1044]

So if the devs have time to implement even a half-baked engine for Wolfpacks, I'd say it would be better than not having it at all and wait for it to be implemented in an uncertain future. Just my 2 cents.

That is what I meant by laying a foundation. :)

[irish1958]

I agree; in fact, I think it would be better if they don't include wolf packs, but make it possible for the modelers to add them and do as Neal suggested with them.
All the developers have to do is study the game's structure and files, and make it possible for us to design and implement both wolf packs AND PLAYABLE DESTROYERS (as in Destroyer Command).
That way, they will have immense interest in the game, in multiplay, in game development, etc by hundreds of talented people (check Tomi's engine room development, OLC mods, GWX, WAC, NYGM etc) for free.

As it is now, we cannot get at the files we need so we can alter them to implement these kinds of game play. They do not have to do it; just make it possible for us to do it.

[mookiemookie]

As it is now, we cannot get at the files we need so we can alter them to implement these kinds of game play. They do not have to do it; just make it possible for us to do it.

I'd go so far as to say that's the approach they should take on all of the items that they'd like to implement but can't, for time or other reasons.

[FIREWALL]

I agree with that too!! :rock:

Even if it would be implemented half the way we modders could maybe use it.

That is what I meant by laying a foundation. :)


A reasonable request for the Dev's to consider imho. :up:

[FIREWALL]

I'd go so far as to say that's the approach they should take on all of the items that they'd like to implement but can't, for time or other reasons.

I agree; in fact, I think it would be better if they don't include wolf packs, but make it possible for the modelers to add them and do as Neal suggested with them.
All the developers have to do is study the game's structure and files, and make it possible for us to design and implement both wolf packs AND PLAYABLE DESTROYERS (as in Destroyer Command).
That way, they will have immense interest in the game, in multiplay, in game development, etc by hundreds of talented people (check Tomi's engine room development, OLC mods, GWX, WAC, NYGM etc) for free.

As it is now, we cannot get at the files we need so we can alter them to implement these kinds of game play. They do not have to do it; just make it possible for us to do it.

:up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :salute: To both of you.

[Platapus]

Frankly I am leery of wolfpacks in the game.

Knowing what little I do about computer programming, I would imagine that it would be a case of the human player having to adjust their play style to match the computer wolfpack AI.

I don't know how the programmers can balance between the extreme of having the AI subs have perfect information or the other extreme they steer straight ahead being stupid.

Once a wolf pack starts the attack, there could be very little (if any) coordination between submarines beyond an agreement that "you take the forward end and I will take the rear end of the convoy." I just can't see any coordinated attacks happening without unrealistic communication between human and AI subs.

I sure would not want to be on the opposite side of the convoy from an AI controlled wolfpack. :o

I also think it would be very frustrating (as it was, I am sure in real life) when I get a good set up on a ship only to have some AI sub get the kill before me.

I agree with the posters who mentioned wolfpacks in a multi-player game. That, to me is the the only reasonable way to incorporate it in to the game.

In SH5 I just want to see a better quality simulator.

Fancy graphics are great
Being asked about the frickin soup would be tiresome
But having more control over the submarine, having better plotting tools that allow the player to concentrate on the data collection (with errors) and decision making while the computer helps with the more mundane tasks... that's what I am looking for in a simulator.

Personally I would much prefer better simulation than wolfpacks.

Just one Kaluen's opinion. Your plot may vary.

[JU_88]

Personally I would much prefer better simulation than wolfpacks.

Bit of contradiction inself that,
Wolfpacks = better simulation.

Do you realise just how a bigger part wolfpacks played in the battle of atlantic?
Watch the Uboat ware documentries on Youtube and you'll will realise that the 'better Uboat simulation' you asking for - is somewhat dependent on wolfpacks
:) You will also realise that historically the Uboats spread themselves far apart so the chanced of tow targeging the same ship? very unlikley indeed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8c_RC2Dkfk

If the devs do include them, i dont expect it will be be perfect no, but once we take part in one...
I think everyone including the doubters like yourself - will quickly wonder how they ever enjoyed SH3 without them.

[Platapus]

Bit of contradiction inself that,
Wolfpacks = better simulation.



Not a contradiction at all. I am more interested in a higher quality simulator of one submarine operation vice a half-assed multi submarine simulator.

If SH5 can do both that's great. My point is that there is still more room for improvement in single submarine simulation.

[JU_88]

Not a contradiction at all. I am more interested in a higher quality simulator of one submarine operation vice a half-assed multi submarine simulator.

If SH5 can do both that's great. My point is that there is still more room for improvement in single submarine simulation.

OK, but what aspect of the simulation are you refering to that needs so much improvment? :oops:

[Platapus]

Well since you asked :)

One of the improvements I would like to see is a more realistic hydrophone system. One where the sound we are listening to corresponds to the target. This would allow us to get estimations of speed within the realistic limitations of a simulation.

Second I would like to see a compromise between two unfortunate extremes in the game concerning the plot

1. God/gps mode where everything is plotted and gift wrapped
2. You are the only one on the sub so you are on your own sucker.

The player should be the source of plotting data. Then the computer, acting as the crew, would, with fidelity (random mistakes?) plot exactly what the Kaluen reports... errors and all. Kaluens did have crews, but the crews were often blind and totally reliant on the Kaluen's observations and more often, guesses.

I would like to see more realistic navigation. For every day that I don't see the stars, my position may be a little more off. It may be off so much that I patrol the wrong area (boy will that make BDU happy). As soon as I can see the stars, my position is recalculated (maybe even give the player the chance to plot if they choose).

I like OLCs range and AOB slide rule as well as the plotting board. But, in real life, I doubt that the Kaluen used it. I would imagine that the Kaluen gave the data to the IWO and the IWO spun the slide rules. The IWO can only be as accurate as the data the Kaluen (me) gives him..... or maybe my IWO will make a mistake... As the Kaluen I better be able to catch that.

I, as the Kaluen, should be able to ask my Navigation officer to plot me an intercept course. Naturally the Nav Officer can only be as accurate as my observations. My point about the plots is to allow the computer to do what it does best... handle data but restrict the data it has to what the player gives it. Allow the player to do what the player does best, make decisions on playing the game.

Let the computer/simulated crew handle the math and the actual graphic plotting, and let the Kaluen/player concentrate on the judgment calls that real Kaluens had to do.

Realism is not removing the crew and making the Kaluen do everything, nor is realism allowing the computer to have GPS.

I would also like a more realistic damage control system. SH4 was a good start but I think it could be done better. Force the Kaluen to prioritize about the pumps. Allow the Kaluen to split up the DC party (less efficient but can work on more than one leak at the same time.... decisions decisions.. clock is ticking Kaluen... make the call!)

Lastly, I want my watch officer to get off his fat tookus and go to the bridge when the sub surfaces!!!!!!!!!

These are some of the things I think, my opinion only, that can make SH5 a better single submarine simulator.

[Platapus]

Oh and TC that actually works.

I would like to have TC dump to 1:1 well before the fifth salvo of the destroyer has impacted my submarine.

[JU_88]

@Platapus.
Gotcha, thats where you and I differ -
You are more concerned with what goes on 'inside' the Uboat,
And I am more concerned with what goes on 'outside' of it.

:haha:

Since one is pretty much usless without the other (and for both our sakes) lets hope the devs will balance the two nicely, wolfpacks or not :03:

[Platapus]

You callin me an Inside the Sub Thinker?????

:D

Here is to wishin that SH5 makes us both happy, no matter what side of the bulkhead our heads (and hearts) may be. :yeah:

[FIREWALL]

I want Air Cond, Ice Cream Maker and 3 Heads dammit. :damn:

Those Fleet Boats have everything. :stare:

[Adriatico]

Not a contradiction at all. I am more interested in a higher quality simulator of one submarine operation vice a half-assed multi submarine simulator.

If SH5 can do both that's great. My point is that there is still more room for improvement in single submarine simulation.

Right, mate...
We need a new sim in a reasonable time period, that must have:
- sophisticated and reliable simulation engine and features
- next generation graphics
- not too long loading time
- reliable savegame (no bugs)

This is enormous job, and I would be delighted to have it all on my table in April ''10.

Such a simulation is very sensitive game... and serious wolfpack could take months to implement and polish.

Sim fans will be - sim fans... and buy great new naval simulation... with or without "counterstrike" cream on top.

:ping:

[TDK1044]

I don't see how you could truly call SHV a simulation of the U Boat war in the Atlantic if you don't include Wolf Packs. The whole essence of the U Boat war was based on the concept of Wolf Packs.

You can have all the graphical and environmental bells and whistles you want, but if you don't include Wolf Packs, at least as an Add On, then you have produced a well made arcade game and not a simulation.

To me, the inclusion of Wolf Packs or not will finally answer the question........Is Silent Hunter V a sim or a game?

[JU_88]

Yes - Imagine if Maddox release Battle of Britain SOW where you were the only Spitfire attacking huge bomber formations.
...and had to rely on MP to have the rest of you squadron attack with you.

Ok its not quite the same - but you get the idea. But in any war sim Its important to feel as though you are apart of the action, not the center peice.
Some folks say they can 'pretend' there are other uboats out there.... I say - I cannot.

[ETR3(SS)]

Whats a wolfpack?:06:

[Adriatico]

Actaually guys... do you consider "wolfpack" a pure multiplayer or ...jumping from one u-boat to another (like Ghost Recon 1) ?

TDK1044 - "at least as an Add On" makes a huge difference to my points on present situation...

[Webster]

i think the key difference here is in the control of the wolfpack, if you want to have true control over everything in the wolfpack then i dont see that as something they should do and i want no part of it.

in the game you are in control of 1 boat "yours", now for wolfpacks they should be completely under AI control and you call for or send them to coordinate attacks at locations you set up or you are sent to meet up with a wolfpack for a coordinated attack. in RL you had no control or "insight" into other boats in the wolfpack so its unreal to want it. they were a group of individuals working as a team but they werent preselecting targets or drawing up plays on a chalkboard to plan attacks.

if sh5 is about hopping from boat to boat then i want no part of it, my boat and my crew are tied to me and my actions and thats the way i like it.

[haegemon]

It's a must.

1. Adds IA for submarines and with it the posibility of beig sunk while on the surface.

2. Is compatible with the devs view about random missions where you're recalled to join.

[haegemon]

i think the key difference here is in the control of the wolfpack, if you want to have true control over everything in the wolfpack then i dont see that as something they should do and i want no part of it.

in the game you are in control of 1 boat "yours", now for wolfpacks they should be completely under AI control and you call for or send them to coordinate attacks at locations you set up or you are sent to meet up with a wolfpack for a coordinated attack. in RL you had no control or "insight" into other boats in the wolfpack so its unreal to want it. they were a group of individuals working as a team but they werent preselecting targets or drawing up plays on a chalkboard to plan attacks.

if sh5 is about hopping from boat to boat then i want no part of it, my boat and my crew are tied to me and my actions and thats the way i like it.

I supose they sustained little radio msgs at safe distance before the radio silence, to interchange coordinates and attack vectors, and this way avoid their thorpedos could impact with a friendy.

[Randomizer]

As one of the low-lifes who voted Pah! Who cares figure now it's time to don the trusty Nomex suit and chime in with a comment or two.

Wolfpack attacks were really only a factor from about summer of 1941 through spring 1943, 22-months or so out of a naval campaign lasting some 68-months in total. So omitting a factor that was important for less than one-third of the war is perhaps less neglectful than some of the rants on this topic deserve.

One of the reasons why the major pack attacks are so well known is because they were so infrequent. Even during the wolfpacking period there were months when there was no successful no pack attacks and more than two per month was rare.

It's a flavour thing, people associate the U-Boat only with the wolfpack but the reality was that the wolfpack U-Boat was a solitary hunter on a long-distance HF radio leash that few players, even many who style themselves as realism freaks, are prepared to wear in the game.

The convoy system in AOTD was nice, the player spots the convoy, AI U-Boats spawn and the length of time you maintained shadowing (plus the random distribution of the AI boats) were big factors in how the pack attack developed. Catching an inbound convoy near air cover was hugely frustrating but it nicely reproduced real events as did taking an easy shot and being driven away, losing contact before the other boats could join.

U-Boats seldom spoke to each other. Lacking line of sight voice VHF like the USN's Talk Between Ships, they were limited to semiphore/flags, signal lamps or loud hailer. Wireless telegraphy even with short signals were almost entirely inadequate for control of a fluid tactical situation like a convoy battle. The Type IX was designed to be a command boat for the Senior Officer afloat but that idea was flushed early in 1940 before there were even enough boats to form a pack.

Am all for AI U-Boats that can converge on a detected convoy and actually conduct attacks but the players part should be limited to passing information to BdU, commanding his/her boat as the operation develops and watching the show.

$0.02

Good Hunting

[Adriatico]

WEBSTER - "...in the game you are in control of 1 boat "yours", now for wolfpacks they should be completely under AI control and you call for or send them to coordinate attacks at locations you set up or you are sent to meet up with a wolfpack for a coordinated attack..."

Sounds simple, but all these AI subs should reasonable "react" to:

-Changed waypoint of escorts
-being detected
-change of weather conditions
-being damaged
-not shooting sinking ship
-not attacking when it's "suicide"
...etc, etc.

If you want all that ( still in a serious simulation ) - could you imagine what does it mean in programing and game development, CPU requirements, RAM required, bugs to be polished... etc.

***
If I had a modern SH5 now on my table... I would agree to wait another 8-10 months for that seriously accomplished wolfpack extension... but I can not play "cartoon" called SH3 till 2011... in order to get that extra feature (polished and reliable).

Also, keep in mind that in early war and late war - "wolfpack" was not realy applied...

***

This is more issue - what we have now and how long we should wait for that feature - rather than "is it desirable".

When it comes to SH3/4/5 series and "waiting game" for things to be "hopefully released" I am sick of it - to be honest.
And not only me...

[haegemon]

The same effort to develop an IA for a single IA submarine. Many of us just want one decent submarine IA. If we can have it with a wolfpack then welcome.

[FIREWALL]

As one of the low-lifes who voted Pah! Who cares figure now it's time to don the trusty Nomex suit and chime in with a comment or two.

Wolfpack attacks were really only a factor from about summer of 1941 through spring 1943, 22-months or so out of a naval campaign lasting some 68-months in total. So omitting a factor that was important for less than one-third of the war is perhaps less neglectful than some of the rants on this topic deserve.

One of the reasons why the major pack attacks are so well known is because they were so infrequent. Even during the wolfpacking period there were months when there was no successful no pack attacks and more than two per month was rare.

It's a flavour thing, people associate the U-Boat only with the wolfpack but the reality was that the wolfpack U-Boat was a solitary hunter on a long-distance HF radio leash that few players, even many who style themselves as realism freaks, are prepared to wear in the game.

The convoy system in AOTD was nice, the player spots the convoy, AI U-Boats spawn and the length of time you maintained shadowing (plus the random distribution of the AI boats) were big factors in how the pack attack developed. Catching an inbound convoy near air cover was hugely frustrating but it nicely reproduced real events as did taking an easy shot and being driven away, losing contact before the other boats could join.

U-Boats seldom spoke to each other. Lacking line of sight voice VHF like the USN's Talk Between Ships, they were limited to semiphore/flags, signal lamps or loud hailer. Wireless telegraphy even with short signals were almost entirely inadequate for control of a fluid tactical situation like a convoy battle. The Type IX was designed to be a command boat for the Senior Officer afloat but that idea was flushed early in 1940 before there were even enough boats to form a pack.

Am all for AI U-Boats that can converge on a detected convoy and actually conduct attacks but the players part should be limited to passing information to BdU, commanding his/her boat as the operation develops and watching the show.

$0.02

Good Hunting

WEBSTER - "...in the game you are in control of 1 boat "yours", now for wolfpacks they should be completely under AI control and you call for or send them to coordinate attacks at locations you set up or you are sent to meet up with a wolfpack for a coordinated attack..."

Sounds simple, but all these AI subs should reasonable "react" to:

-Changed waypoint of escorts
-being detected
-change of weather conditions
-being damaged
-not shooting sinking ship
-not attacking when it's "suicide"
...etc, etc.

If you want all that ( still in a serious simulation ) - could you imagine what does it mean in programing and game development, CPU requirements, RAM required, bugs to be polished... etc.

***
If I had a modern SH5 now on my table... I would agree to wait another 8-10 months for that seriously accomplished wolfpack extension... but I can not play "cartoon" called SH3 till 2011... in order to get that extra feature (polished and reliable).

Also, keep in mind that in early war and late war - "wolfpack" was not realy applied...

***

This is more issue - what we have now and how long we should wait for that feature - rather than "is it desirable".

When it comes to SH3/4/5 series and "waiting game" for things to be "hopefully released" I am sick of it - to be honest.
And not only me...


Looking at both your posts :up: gave me a idea to somewhat accomplish this. Bare with me as I might no use the right terms and\or explain right what came to me as I read both your posts. But I think your BOTH on the right track. Okay ?

[Platapus]

I also question the effectiveness of wolfpacks in real life.

In checking the wolfpack database on Uboat.net, I was only able to find a few wolfpacks that were able to sink as many ships as there were Uboats in the pack.

Some had very bad luck. 21 subs in one wolfpack and 0 ships sunk (Landsknect Jan 43)

The U-584 participated in 11 wolfpack missions and only sunk 3 merchants for 18K tons + 1 warship. Such is life in a wolfpack I guess.

There were a few Wolf packs who were able to achieve a better ratio than 1:1 (one sunk ship for every sub in the pack), but most of them seemed to be a bit lower.

In some of my other readings, I seems to me that wolfpacks are a wonderful concept, but difficult to implement.

I wonder if those 21 subs in Kandsknect would not have been better dispersed?

Hindsight always being 20/20, it is easy to answer of course.

So even if it is possible to model wolfpacks realistically in SH5, would it be even worth it? :D

[JU_88]

Can we PLEASE, PLEASE STOP the sillyness about the drain that wolfpacks have on Cpu & Ram resources?
Trust me -you dont know how silly that is!
Its actually on par with saying that "the world is flat!" - YES ITS THAT SILLY! :rotfl2:

If anyone can rationally support this argument (in proper technical terms)
E.G explain to me WHY Wolf packs will cause this massive FPS hit ....

....I will personally buy you your copy of SH5 and thats a promise! :D

[Hitman]

As one of the low-lifes who voted Pah! Who cares figure now it's time to don the trusty Nomex suit and chime in with a comment or two.

Wolfpack attacks were really only a factor from about summer of 1941 through spring 1943, 22-months or so out of a naval campaign lasting some 68-months in total. So omitting a factor that was important for less than one-third of the war is perhaps less neglectful than some of the rants on this topic deserve.

One of the reasons why the major pack attacks are so well known is because they were so infrequent. Even during the wolfpacking period there were months when there was no successful no pack attacks and more than two per month was rare.

It's a flavour thing, people associate the U-Boat only with the wolfpack but the reality was that the wolfpack U-Boat was a solitary hunter on a long-distance HF radio leash that few players, even many who style themselves as realism freaks, are prepared to wear in the game.

The convoy system in AOTD was nice, the player spots the convoy, AI U-Boats spawn and the length of time you maintained shadowing (plus the random distribution of the AI boats) were big factors in how the pack attack developed. Catching an inbound convoy near air cover was hugely frustrating but it nicely reproduced real events as did taking an easy shot and being driven away, losing contact before the other boats could join.

U-Boats seldom spoke to each other. Lacking line of sight voice VHF like the USN's Talk Between Ships, they were limited to semiphore/flags, signal lamps or loud hailer. Wireless telegraphy even with short signals were almost entirely inadequate for control of a fluid tactical situation like a convoy battle. The Type IX was designed to be a command boat for the Senior Officer afloat but that idea was flushed early in 1940 before there were even enough boats to form a pack.

Am all for AI U-Boats that can converge on a detected convoy and actually conduct attacks but the players part should be limited to passing information to BdU, commanding his/her boat as the operation develops and watching the show.

That's pretty right in many aspects. And it is good to add that most ships were sunk not as a result of wolfpack action against convoys, but instead when sailing independently. Also, it was just a handful of commanders who did the most sinkings with many u-boats (and corresponding Kaleuns) not even being able to ever make a shot. Plus wolfpacks were also almost never used in many patrol areas -The mediterranean, south america, indian ocean, black sea, caribbean, US east coast, arctic sea, to name the most importants-

That said ... wolfpacks were still hugely important in the north atlantic, where Dönitz focused his activity as long as he could. And from summer 1941 to may 1943, engaging the increasingly well protected convoys in the north atlantic, with radar equipped escorts, is something that a wolfpack allows best. The wolfpacks were conceived as concentration of attack against concentration of defence, and you just have to play a bit SH3 and try to engage all by yourself a mid-war convoy to understand why. The need for escorts to move from their postion and engage some U-Boat allowed others to slip through easier and attack. You can experience that very well in Aces Of the Deep, even if it is not a 100% accurate representation of the wolfpack action.

:salute:

[JU_88]

Yeah i dont get the way be are playing Wolfpacks down by saying "it was ONLY from 1941 to 1943" :haha:
Hell maybe they should leave out 'Operation Drumbeat' too while we're at it :doh:

[dcb]

Adding to all the recent debate, please all 'NO WOLFPACK' people allow me to remind you something that was not understood to its full extent, IMHO.
Actually, bringing Wolfpacks in is much more than just Uboats hunting in packs. I'd even say that the main thing behind Wolfpacks, in game terms, is the submarine AI. This is what we've been missing from day 1, since the early days of SH3. With a decent submarine AI, with all due controllers in place in the AI code, there would be so many ways open for people to mod the game to their liking, we could even bring in our own wolfpacks if devs are short on time.
It's not only about wolfpacks, but also about having friendly and enemy submarines in the game - the latter, unlike wolfpacks, had a role throughout the whole war.
So, if people say "NO WOLFPACKS PLEASE," they should think rather in terms of "would we like to have submarine AI in the game, or would we prefer once again to have an incomplete SH installment", missing the so important underwater AI?

And BTW, if you say NO to wolfpacks, you also say NO to any expansion pack that might feature playable surface ships, because no submarine AI means you'll have no computer-controlled uboat foe.

[TwistedFemur]

A must for me. After all COAD had them even if they were an abstract representation, they were real enough for me:salute:

[Yosarian]

And BTW, if you say NO to wolfpacks, you also say NO to any expansion pack that might feature playable surface ships, because no submarine AI means you'll have no computer-controlled uboat foe.

And Destroyer Command had AI-boats, they were not brilliant in their actions but they attacked the convoy and the FPS not went down. Ubisoft has the source code of DC, why can this AI code not be modified and ported to the new game engine, or at least taken as an example?

[Adriatico]

It is all issue what you expect from AI subs...

Do you expect them just to exist and attract escorts on oposite side of convoy... or to do the same things that you do ?

SH series is "planing, thinking and reacting" game... and most of you know what is your brain going trough when playing DID in GWX in early 1943.

If my brain is exausted after 3 hours of convoy raid... why do you think that 2-3 AI subs ( doing the same things in serious simulation) would not warm up your PC ?

I always emphasize "serious simulation"... because introduction of AI could damage sensitive line between simulation and shooting spree !
(...killing SH brand like boomerang)

This is not formation of friendly JU-88 flying by and dropping bombs (although it was hitting my frame rate) but enormous additional task for Romanian develpment team.

***
Please, let us see confirmation of release date and one daylight screen - before ordering "lobsters and pancakes" from Romania.

[JU_88]

It is all issue what you expect from AI subs...

Do you expect them just to exist and attract escorts on oposite side of convoy... or to do the same things that you do ?

SH series is "planing, thinking and reacting" game... and most of you know what is your brain going trough when playing DID in GWX in early 1943.

If my brain is exausted after 3 hours of convoy raid... why do you think that 2-3 AI subs ( doing the same things in serious simulation) would not warm up your PC ?

I always emphasize "serious simulation"... because introduction of AI could damage sensitive line between simulation and shooting spree !
(...killing SH brand like boomerang)

This is not formation of friendly JU-88 flying by and dropping bombs (although it was hitting my frame rate) but enormous additional task for Romanian develpment team.

***
Please, let us see confirmation of release date and one daylight screen - before ordering "lobsters and pancakes" from Romania.


AI subs, we expect them to dive/surface and shoot torpeedos.
thats it. no one expects them to be as good as a human player. You cant compare you own control to that of the AI, it is totally different.
Many things we humans do are very easy for the AI to handle, but some other things are impossible.

About you loss of FPS when JU 88s attacked, in Sh3, there was an FPS hit when aircraft attacked especailly when in port, but this was NOT because of the AI scripts, nor was graphics related.
It was in fact caused by too many instances of a Soundfile being played - the sound of mutilple AA guns going off when every AA gun in the area starts shooting...
Test it an see, as sson as many AA guns start shooting , your FPS goes to crap.

[THE_MASK]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=156040&page=7
Quote by marean "(wolfpacks maybe)"

[Arclight]

Had to vote "if they have some spare time".

Yes, I want wolfpacks, but not at the expense of other features/polish. :-?

[Adriatico]

Well, there are so many general opininons "pro et contra"... so I would feel free to propose my vision of "wolfpack level", both active and passive.
Of course... IF and WHEN it comes on drawing board.

It must be very limited and restricted - in order to avoid naval shooter...instead of naval sim.

Active feature:

1) There is only 1 AI unit that you can interact with - in action
2) In your campaign (career) you have to gain fair amount of points - to unlock bonus: to call-in another U-boat to assist your action (once)
3) It is up to you when to use that bonus - for example: you direct AI sub North of convoy-path and set your ambush South of convoy
4) AI sub would trigger it's approach and attack - upon scripted "visual contact" with convoy
5) AI sub would be limited to fire max. 3 torps (medium range) and exit the action instantly
6) It is up to you to predict the new situation and take advantage of it
7) After that - you have to gain again required points in your campaign to unlock another "active use of AI sub"
8) Feature could be available 1942/43 only
9) This is not applied to Naval Academy - where you can practice coordinated attack as much as you want

Passive feature:

1) You can receive "radio message" to go (within next 24h) to assist u-baot "X" in attack of convoy spoted "Y" and heading...
2) It is up to your navigation skills to take the best position at predicted convoy path
3) Your radio message of "visual contact" - will trigger AI approach and attack... the same limited way as described above in "active feature"
4) Failing to get in "visual contact" and radio message within 24h - would deduct some points from your account
5) Could happen max 2 times per year
6) Possible 1942/43 only

It would be nice refreshment in simulation... but still at safe distance from "naval shooter".
Some of you would see this as "paranoic restriction" but - be aware what happened to RaibowSix simulation... for example.
It would not take ages to implement in a new simulation...

This is only my proposal... with a scope to turn this thread in a more creative way. I would be glad to see your proposals... :ping:

(Yes... Seeing what is "trend" in PC gaming - I am paranoic about SH5 sailing away from sim-waters into popular "convoy terminator"...)

[almg]

Pack of wolves are part of the Battle of the Atlantic !
So they must be in Silent Hunter V !

[Hitman]

If my brain is exausted after 3 hours of convoy raid... why do you think that 2-3 AI subs ( doing the same things in serious simulation) would not warm up your PC ?

Because Aces of the Deep, a 1994 DOS game already had AI submarines that engaged the convoy and evaded the escorts, and it would work on an IBM 486 with 16k RAM

So go figure how much it would heat the most slow PC of any SH5 player :haha:

[Adriatico]

Oh really ?
Also, Pacman had multiple octopuses so i guess you can apply the same engine to SH5...

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/1470/pacman1.png

Great news to Ubisoft Romania...
;)

[Hartmann]

Because Aces of the Deep, a 1994 DOS game already had AI submarines that engaged the convoy and evaded the escorts, and it would work on an IBM 486 with 16k RAM

So go figure how much it would heat the most slow PC of any SH5 player :haha:

yes true, and all in a few megabites of space disk.

For example another game, "Wolfpack" have Ia subs in only 700 k floppy disk , so i guess that the size is not a problem with sh5. it could be not enough time implement it to the game

And sturmovik il-1946 with several planes flying around :haha:

[vickers03]

Oh really ?
Also, Pacman had multiple octopuses so i guess you can apply the same engine to SH5...i always thought they were scary ghosts:D

[JScones]

Heck, forget AoTD, they had Wolfpacks simulated waaaay back in 1983, and on the C64 no less:

http://ui01.gamefaqs.com/1536/gfs_797_2_1.jpg

[Hartmann]

Pacman engine for silent hunter :haha:

First mod ? well, replace the ghost or octopuses with destroyers

[haegemon]

Something to apply to ships and maybe to submarines into a fleet. We got the radio, and why not sight comunications using morse with lights. Watch tower crew could recive visual msgs. :D

[Reece]

Not having read the whole thread one thing to remember, once an AI u-boat has fired his torpedo the whole convoy will start zig zagging/separate, so the chance of lining up a set of easy targets will be out, be more of a hit and miss situation or salvo's!:hmmm: but then that is probably why most didn't score, slow convoys wouldn't be bad but fast ones .... well, would be interesting just to see em scatter and watch the DD's!!:yep:

[mookiemookie]

Not having read the whole thread one thing to remember, once an AI u-boat has fired his torpedo the whole convoy will start zig zagging/separate, so the chance of lining up a set of easy targets will be out, be more of a hit and miss situation or salvo's!:hmmm: but then that is probably why most didn't score, slow convoys wouldn't be bad but fast ones .... well, would be interesting just to see em scatter and watch the DD's!!:yep:

Convoys would already be running in zig zag patterns to begin with. SH3 had it wrong on the physics of it though...5000 to 10,000 ton ships could not stop on a dime and change directions like they do in the game.

[Reece]

I have seen quite a few documentaries and yes some were zigzagging but the majority I saw weren't, but even so once that first one is hit the group will start to scatter, they all couldn't line up and wait for the order to fire, once one fires they all open up at random firing at the best possible target ... ready or not!:yep:

[TteFAboB]

I've voted 50/50.

I'd love to have decent Wolfpacks. I'd hate to have them poorly implemented. I.e. I want to perform a surprise attack, but no matter what, Mr. Game Script has Kaulen Karl Idioten always charging and alerting the convoy as soon as I spot it.

If they add to gameplay and fun instead of becoming a nuisance, then I'm all for them.

But I've played 2 good games without them, SH3 and SH4, and I could live without them if there was no time or money to spare on a decent implementation of them. I rather not have them than have them done poorly or annoyingly.

[Adriatico]

Agree 100% TteFAboB.

Sophisticated and limited WP could refresh and enrich the sim.

Rushing into simple implementation, just to have it, could stuff up the whole sim.

:dead:

[Webster]

its simple enough to do with online play, get together with your friends and form a wolfpack and go sink ships.

as long as ubi doesnt stop this from happening with online players then you can do wolfpacks as long as you have enough players involved.

you could even employ players as scouts to find and report targets for you.

[Argus00]

50/50

I've enjoyed the game without wolfpacks since SH3, so I know I'll be having fun with SH5 even without wolfpacks. And if they do actually implement working wolfpacks, the game will be that much more awesomer(*1) for me :rock:

(*1) = wolfpack technical term :know:

[Uber Gruber]

If we're going to leave wolfpacks out for fear of something NEW being in SH5 then could I suggest we leave teh Luftwaffe out as well, they were bloody useless anyway and hardly sank that many ships. Oh, and might as well get rid of all the ports around england as the U-Boats only penetrated a few. Whilst we're at it, lets get rid of the mines, and all the neutral shipping....they're only a distraction anyway. :nope:

[THE_MASK]

Quote from ubi questions and answers 08/10/09
Will there be any AI operated boats forming a Wolfpack?

There will be AI operated boats. Wolfpack mechanics are under consideration. This is something we always wanted to do but we want to do them properly so there’s a question if we’ll be able to fit them before release.

[Arclight]

Good news as far as I'm concerned; I would like them to do it properly as well. I guess if it doesn't make release, it can be patched in.

Heck, I'd even buy it as DLC/add-on. :)

[THE_MASK]

Whats the fascination with wofpacks in the game anyway . In real life it was good because as a group you want to disrupt the escorts and sink as many ships as possible as a pack . How would it work in the game thoughfor the single player . Would you recieve a message to intercept a convoy and wait until the shadowing sub torp explodes and then its a free for all with you just seeing and hearing ships being hit by some ai pseudo uboat . Whats the fun in that or am i not getting it .

[Arclight]

Don't think it's fascination, it's just that wolfpacks played a big role in the battle of the Atlantic. Any subsim depicting warfare in the Atlantic during WWII should have wolfpacks, pretty much by definition. :hmmm:

[IanC]

Don't think it's fascination, it's just that wolfpacks played a big role in the battle of the Atlantic. Any subsim depicting warfare in the Atlantic during WWII should have wolfpacks, pretty much by definition. :hmmm:

Well said.

[JU_88]

Don't think it's fascination, it's just that wolfpacks played a big role in the battle of the Atlantic. Any subsim depicting warfare in the Atlantic during WWII should have wolfpacks, pretty much by definition. :hmmm:

Yes lack of wolf packs is almost a big as leaving out Operation Drumbeat, or leaving out the Type IIs.
It was major. Whether people think its potentially fun or not doesnt really matter - if you want historical accuracey, you want wolfpacks.
And if after playing as apart of one you dont like it - then dont join one next time!

Me personally I just didnt want to be the only operatational Submarine in the entire war (again). Leaving AI submarines out of subsim just seems criminal - So im glad they are in this time. :up:
That alone already makes it feel more like the Battle of Atalantic - and less like Quake II with a submarine.

[makman94]

Whats the fascination with wofpacks in the game anyway . In real life it was good because as a group you want to disrupt the escorts and sink as many ships as possible as a pack . How would it work in the game thoughfor the single player . Would you recieve a message to intercept a convoy and wait until the shadowing sub torp explodes and then its a free for all with you just seeing and hearing ships being hit by some ai pseudo uboat . Whats the fun in that or am i not getting it .

I will agree with Sober. wolfpacks are historical fact but in the game i think that it will be annoying.imagine to have anything setted for the attack and the ship (one moment before the 'bite') to change course and speed becuase the pc controled sub hit some other ship first.well ,if it will be something like that...i really don't want wolfpacks. ( for sure,it demands a lot of thought from devs on how wolfpacks would work in the game.i have....not even one good idea for this...)

[JU_88]

I will agree with Sober. wolfpacks are historical fact but in the game i think that it will be annoying.imagine to have anything setted for the attack and the ship (one moment before the 'bite') to change course and speed becuase the pc controled sub hit some other ship first.well ,if it will be something like that...i really don't want wolfpacks. ( for sure,it demands a lot of thought from devs on how wolfpacks would work in the game.i have....not even one good idea for this...)

Meh I'll disagree, because you could apply the same argument to everything,
E.G - I dont want the Luftwaffe in the game incase they steal my kills or mess up my shot.
Start removeing all these imsersive elements and you end up with Quake II in a submarine, rather than an actual war.
Come to think of it; getting depth charged is even more 'annoying' - should we remove destroyers too perhaps?

Secondly, you guys need to think of how the benefits worked in reality - and could also work in the game, so lets say the convoy scatters or zig-zags, but while the escorts are off hounding an AI uboat, you can get in between the convoy lanes pick of targets, you will hardly miss at 400 meters. zig-zag or not.
Just means adjusting your play style- and for 90% of the war you will probably still be attacking alone anyway.
Im just saying look on the bright side...

Hell, this argument is repeated like 1000 times in this thread, I dont know why I am repeating it yet again.

[makman94]

Meh I'll disagree, because you could apply the same argument to everything,
E.G - I dont want the Luftwaffe in the game incase they steal my kills or mess up my shot.
Start removeing all these imsersive elements and you end up with Quake II in a submarine, rather than an actual war.
Come to think of it; getting depth charged is even more 'annoying' - should we remove destroyers too perhaps?

Secondly, you guys need to think of how it worked in reality - and could also work in the game, so lets say the convoy scatters or zig-zags but while the escorts are off hounding an AI uboat, you can get in between the convoy lanes pick of targets, you will hardly miss at 400 meters. zig-zag or not.
Just means adjusting your play style- and for 90% of the war you will probably still be attacking alone anyway.
Im just saying look on the bright side...

Hell, this argument is repeated like 1000 times in this thread, I dont know why I am repeating it yet again.

to be honest Ju 88 i didn't read all the posts ...i saw the post of Sober and as i was agreed with him.. i posted my opinion ! sorry if my post is repeating other posts .
now, i agree with you to almost everything you said
i disagree with this part '' ...Start removeing all these imsersive elements and you end up with Quake II in a submarine, rather than an actual war.
Come to think of it; getting depth charged is even more 'annoying' - should we remove destroyers too perhaps?....''
as you said it is a matter of tastes.for me ...manual targeting is the 'hot' point of sh series.i don't care about cinematics battles with a lot of subs attacking and me throwing torps from 400m just to be sure that will hit..i really don't find something interesting on that.and these zig-zags you mentioned was really a bad point of sh3 ....they never changed course ...only zig-zaging(nice that this was improved with sh4)
edit:forgot to say that been depth charged is an interesting part of the game becuase you must take action to plan your escape ...its the half game
i don't know this ''Quake II'' you are saying Ju88 but if it has to do with a lonely fighter ...thats ok for me . it will be much more interesting if we have and ...endless single mission campaign ....meaning taking orders from BDU for what to do next ...look here: message for the devs and not only... (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=155802)
it was an idea of Rubini and ACSoft ....imo that would be more realistic (and you will not 'feel'...lonely) than...wolfpacks

But all these are...tastes ! :DL....devs will have the last word !
thank you for your reply
bye

[THE_MASK]

How would you like it to work ingame ?

[JU_88]

But all these are...tastes ! :DL....devs will have the last word !
thank you for your reply
bye


True true. everybody like different things :)
Hey have you really never heard of Quake? :o

[makman94]

How would you like it to work ingame ?

as i said...i have no idea at all !

[makman94]

True true. everybody like different things :)
Hey have you really never heard of Quake? :o

no i haven't play it,i think i saw it somewhere (something like doom...right?)but i don't like this bam-boom games

[THE_MASK]

as i said...i have no idea at all !sorry that was meant for ju88 , i should have quoted .

[Steeltrap]

As has been suggested, the deciding factor for me is how wolfpacks might be represented in the game.

Am I in favour of the concept of wolfpacks? Yes.

Until I know how they are represented, however, I can't say whether they are important to me.

For example, if they were done in a way I really dislike (and, no, I'm not thinking of any particular way), I would be against them, even though I know they were important for a critical part of the Atlantic war.

[Arclight]

Nicely put Steeltrap, I agree. :up:

Though it might add historical accuracy and would be an interesting feature for some, there's a lot of potential to negatively impact gameplay (not per se, just potential).

They need to balance gameplay and historical accuracy against each other. If I was developing it, I'd probably go for gameplay to appeal to more gamers; it's a business after all. :-?



A possibility would be to have the pack follow your lead; they attack after you launched the first attack. But that would still leave the possibility of a convoy going on high alert after detecting an AI-controlled boat.

[NoLine]

3. (HB73): During the dynamic campaign if we report by radio "convoy in sight" (I'm assuming we can do this :)) can we expect other U-Boats to join us?
(Devteam): Convoy shadowing and radio reports were an important part of the wolfpack tactics, and this will be reflected in our game too.

this is from the devteam daily question (http://www.silenthunteriii.com/uk/devteamquestions3.php) about SH3


I hope there in but ill buy any subsim, just cant help it :)

Noline

[PL_Andrev]

I think it is not complicate to implementation...

All uboots should be "phantom" uboots which have BRT (or KIA) as random value, depended from "real" skill (real BRT on IIWW) and difficulty level.
About wolpacks... these same situation. If uboot is near convoy, his attack can be "random" function with firing torpedoes and ship hitting.

I hope that in SH5 will be implemented German tankers for ubootwaffe, type XIV uboots (for fuel and torpedoes supply) and contact with other uboots to (re)supply fuel with Paukenschlag Operations.

Other issue which can be implemented:
1) Middleterrain Sea operations
2) Pacyfic missions (why not?)
3) Play single missions or multimode with other nationalities submarine...
4) Real DC game in adversalial mode (or single patrol / missions / multi)

:cool:

But I think all these item can be implemented in next add-on to SH5...
of course that depend from popularity of SH5...
If quality of SH5 will equal SH3 (without SH3 bugs)...

[Sailor Steve]

It would be nice if AI subs operating individually and in wolfpacks could be implemented. The problem I see (and hope can be done correctly) is of complete behavior. By this I mean some subs sinking ships, some drawing the attention of the escorts, and some not being able to get into position at all.

Part of the immersion would be the after-action reports - U-57 claims 2 kills, U-106 claims one, U-66 reports not being able to attack and U-234 doesn't report in at all.

It sounds like a tough job to do it right, but it would have to be done right or what's the point?

[looney]

Did Uboats have communications on sea to others than to HQ?? yea maybe when they meet some other Uboat but else they where silent not?

[Dave Kay]

I'm curious, how did you establish that fact?

I'm betting AI wolfpacks put no more of a drain on the computer than AI ships in a convoy.

Wolfpacks: Absolute must.

HERE-HERE! While playing AOD on my little old 486 PC, I was ordered by BDU to shadow convoys until ordered to attack... was that just a dream?

Convoys or bust!

[Akula4745]

Wolfpacks would be awesome... but if the devs do not already have them in the game - then I doubt we will see them in SH5... no matter how hard we wish for them.

[Paulowanclift]

A.I. Wolfpacks would make an unacceptable drain on the computer's resources and drastically impact frame-rates. Sorry, but that's a fact.

My verdict is that Wolfpacks should only be available in Multi-player.

Nonsense, modern computers can handle way more complicated AI than this.

[Dave Kay]

Bit of contradiction inself that,
Wolfpacks = better simulation.

Do you realise just how a bigger part wolfpacks played in the battle of atlantic?
Watch the Uboat ware documentries on Youtube and you'll will realise that the 'better Uboat simulation' you asking for - is somewhat dependent on wolfpacks
:) You will also realise that historically the Uboats spread themselves far apart so the chanced of tow targeging the same ship? very unlikley indeed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8c_RC2Dkfk

If the devs do include them, i dont expect it will be be perfect no, but once we take part in one...
I think everyone including the doubters like yourself - will quickly wonder how they ever enjoyed SH3 without them.

Couldn't agree more JU88: in the Battle of The Atlantic, which this game presumably simulates, wolfpacks were THE ESSENTIAL element in Donitz plan to defeat Britain and he very nearly did. So IMHO, to develop yet another version of SH without wolfpacks leaves me wondering why. Better graphics/interface/ et al, would be great, but that alone won't make me rush out to buy just another souped up version of what I already have. Not to mention that many will very probably be needing a newer, faster machine to run it on--- I fail to see the point in it all.

To the Devs: some form of wolfpack attacks are a MUST for any newer version of this game to make it a blockbuster--- and I'm not talking about multi-player type wolfpack play. Personally, I don't think many of the hardcore crowd will be very enthusiatic about a new release without them. Delay the release if you must but PLEASE don't ignore the the cry for wolfpacks.

Thank you

[Rockin Robbins]

U-Boats without wolfpacks are about as realistic as fleet boats without water.:D

[Jimbuna]

Couldn't agree more JU88: in the Battle of The Atlantic, which this game presumably simulates, wolfpacks were THE ESSENTIAL element in Donitz plan to defeat Britain and he very nearly did. So IMHO, to develop yet another version of SH without wolfpacks leaves me wondering why. Better graphics/interface/ et al, would be great, but that alone won't make me rush out to buy just another souped up version of what I already have. Not to mention that many will very probably be needing a newer, faster machine to run it on--- I fail to see the point in it all.

To the Devs: some form of wolfpack attacks are a MUST for any newer version of this game to make it a blockbuster--- and I'm not talking about multi-player type wolfpack play. Personally, I don't think many of the hardcore crowd will be very enthusiatic about a new release without them. Delay the release if you must but PLEASE don't ignore the the cry for wolfpacks.

Thank you

Let us hope your post and those by many others are acted upon http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[urfisch]

seriuosly, it cannot be that hard to code wolfpacks. if we assume, there are pros in romania. and if we are honest, we already succeed to add ai boats, that act independent and added compartments - so, if these two things are done professionally, THAT would be a really new, big feature for us experienced simmers. personally i think wolfpacks and interaction with other boats IS IT. what else would be new?

am i wrong?

:cool:

[Dave Kay]

seriuosly, it cannot be that hard to code wolfpacks. if we assume, there are pros in romania. and if we are honest, we already succeed to add ai boats, that act independent and added compartments - so, if these two things are done professionally, THAT would be a really new, big feature for us experienced simmers. personally i think wolfpacks and interaction with other boats IS IT. what else would be new?

am i wrong?

:cool:

Not completely wrong Sir, but please consider...

TO THE DEVS: As someone who believes that wolfpacks are absolutely essential for a newer release of this already fantastic sim, I understand that there may be reasons beyond your control for NOT making it so. Someone mentioned somewhere in this forum that the Dev Team may well be facing constraints in time, budget, ect., (or something to that effect) and though it may be possible to make wolfpacks part of SH5, our hopes could be sunk for those very reasons. Otherwise, and I think many would aggree, I would surely hate to see wolfpacks done in a less-than-fully dedicated manner, i. e. VERY REALISTIC--- as you all have done an incredible job on many other aspects of this sim.

Please note also that historically/realisticaly speaking; the wolfpack aspect of the war was only able to be implemented effectively in the earlier part of the U-Boat war and was later thwarted by advances in Allied ASW capabilities and in particular, the breaking of the Enigma Code. So perhaps this wolfpack thing may not be so terribly difficult to add to SH5 as a "historic period of game-play" after which, when a player's career passes a certain point, wolfpacks would no longer be part of the sim-coding. Grand Admiral Carl Donitz retreated from Rudel Tactic later in the war due to unacceptable U-Boat losses and I'm wondering if this could be refected in the sim-play, giving us hard-core sub-simmers an historically accurate product.

Thank you again... and I digress.

[IrishUboot]

Contacting and communicating with other U-boats would be such a pleasure.

A must have.

[THE_MASK]

Waiting for the "We have wolfpacks thread" .

[JScones]

Did Uboats have communications on sea to others than to HQ?? yea maybe when they meet some other Uboat but else they where silent not?
Every source I've read says it was very rare for U-boats to contact each other directly and when they did it was under direct instruction from BdU. Here's an extract from one source (http://www.uboatarchive.net/KTBNotesCommunicationsCumulativeEdition.htm) (simply a convenient online source) that is not too dissimilar to others that I have read...

(vi) Intercommunication between U-boats.
(a) Direct intercommunication between U-boats is rare; U-boats listen out for H/F transmissions from other U-boats to Control. When, for instance, a pack of U-boats are operating against a convoy, co-operation between boats is ensured by making them keep watch on a convoy wave on their H/F receivers, and make their reports on the same wave. These reports are re-broadcast by control so that all boats will receive them, whether they have managed to intercept the originator's report or not. If one of the boats detailed for the task is unable to find the convoy, it will signal Control requesting M/F beacon signals from a shadower, and Control will detail a boat in contact to make the necessary signals. A similar is adopted if a boat is finding difficulty in making a rendezvous with a supply boat. (B2)The U-boat Commander's Handbook also mentions a limitation on U-boat to U-boat contact (bold added for emphasis)...
The only means of, communication between the submarine and Headquarters, and between the submarines themselves, which is of decisive importance for the development and success of the attack, is wireless telegraphyWhere U-boats did contact each other directly, it was via telegraph, flags or lamps. If underwater, the effective range of the unterwassertelegraphie was around 10 miles. If surfaced, then the preference was to use flags or lamps when in visible range (say for a milk cow docking). I've not found a reference anywhere for when boats were surfaced but not in visible range, but based on the comment in the Commander's Handbook, I'd hazard a guess that in such cases comms were via BdU.

Further detailed info on U-boat Communications equipment can be read here (http://www.uboatarchive.net/KTBNotesCommunications.htm).

[kptn_kaiserhof]

i agree

[Dave Kay]

In an effort to encourage further participation in this poll AND, hopefully, to draw the attention of the UBI-DEVS, I submit my interpretation of the tally so far with a total of 322 votes.

I set the "must-have/I-don't-care" dividing line at the 50/50 vote. Please feel free to debate/debunk my interpretation and I welcome any input.

count 127: either don't care about wolfpacks or have 50/50 interest

count 195: a must have addition to the game or little interest without

Result; 39.45 percent don't care or have 50/50 interest and 60.55 percent are positively for wolfpacks.

Now, taking that 50/50 vote and assuming that give or take 40 votes FOR/against wolfpacks, I would say that the tally is running HIGHLY in favor of implementing wolfpacks in the newest SH release--- so far.

At the risk of being flagged as redundant, I'm also hopeful that the SubSim staff will consider my continued efforts to see wolfpacks in SH5 as noble and sincere. My greatest desire is to see this game become the absolute finest sub-sim of its generation.

[finchOU]

ditto..

Hate to not buy games...I dont want to be that guy who does not help a unique community survive. Having said that..I bought SH3 before it hit the stores and was very excited about how much Graphically and game playwise it had improved the genre. But that was SH3....this is SH5. I've been in the gameplay over graphics crowd (both are very important for replay value) for a long long time...and again this subject is killing me. Why, with all the bitches/moans/groans (a la SH2, SH3, SH4) in the past was this not the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY to implement in SH5? Look..I'm not a programmer...I dont write code..it is not my language...but it seems priorities have been misplaced. Yeah..I'm of those who believe if it was done in the past ...future installments should not only have it...but make it better. It was anything great..not necessarily that realistic..but it was absolutely better than nothing..and it did wonders for gameplay. I"m not saying I'm not going to buy SH5..i'm saying A. I'm not going to pre order it and B. I'm only going to buy it based on reviews from THIS site based solely on past releases and Not having this popular feature at the moment. Can you honestly blame me?

As much as I Love Ubi for carrying on the tradition of WW2 Subsims....I loath that they have us by the balls and make all the calls (aka no competition)..but that is how the world works. This brings be back to the year before SH3 came out...when it was not even going to have a dynamic campaign. Some how it was conveyed to Ubi that this was a show stopper...no way SH3 would sell like it should unless it had the DC. I dont know if it was this subsims inputs that got the change in or just an oversight by Ubi. But something lit a fire under them to change it...maybe it was just one of the programmers actually caring about inputs from the site. I dont know. I'm just a U-boat sim fan. Now again....I feel we have this fork in the road that COULD be taken to improve on the sim and make more sales. Thats just me. I mean..can we at least make it open to Modders so that it can be part of SH5 at some point? unlike SH3?

This thread should never die!

[Méo]

ditto..

Hate to not buy games...I dont want to be that guy who does not help a unique community survive. Having said that..I bought SH3 before it hit the stores and was very excited about how much Graphically and game playwise it had improved the genre. But that was SH3....this is SH5. I've been in the gameplay over graphics crowd (both are very important for replay value) for a long long time...and again this subject is killing me. Why, with all the bitches/moans/groans (a la SH2, SH3, SH4) in the past was this not the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY to implement in SH5? Look..I'm not a programmer...I dont write code..it is not my language...but it seems priorities have been misplaced. Yeah..I'm of those who believe if it was done in the past ...future installments should not only have it...but make it better. It was anything great..not necessarily that realistic..but it was absolutely better than nothing..and it did wonders for gameplay. I"m not saying I'm not going to buy SH5..i'm saying A. I'm not going to pre order it and B. I'm only going to buy it based on reviews from THIS site based solely on past releases and Not having this popular feature at the moment. Can you honestly blame me?

I see what you mean and i'm not blaming you but...

The thing is that i don't think that their number one priority is to please us, their priority is probably to ensure that the game will sell.

So their decision to go with the ''first person view'' before wolfpacks is probablay a marketing one, so the game could be more attractive for the casual player.

Nevertheless, i agree with you that wolfpacks are a must this time but i doubt that they will be in on release. I guess (and i think someone already said that) that they will be in a add-on or something.

On the other hand, IF there will be no wolfpacks at all in SHV neither at the release nor in a add-on, then i will be seriously considering to boycott Ubisoft products.

Last thing, i don't think it's the devs fault, it's surely their bosses and the marketing who set priorities.

[looney]

About convoy behaviour: in SH4 we see ships make complete 180 turns wich is stupid imho maybe if it's a loner but in a convoy most ships would stay on course and make evasive manouvres as a convoy... It was very important that the convoy's got through and the sailors knew that. Only 1 ship would stay behind to rescue the men in the water. The convoy itself would stay together and try to outrun the Uboat. With 1 or 2 excorts racing to the attacker to drive it under or away.

Gamewise I like to see realisting ship behaviour. As well as realistic convoy's (not all equally spaced, small difference in speed. not perfect in line). For RL uboat skippers it was almost impossible to hit 4 ships in 1 attack (check uboat.net for the general results of convow battles), as it was almost impossible for the merchants to stay precisly in their spot.

[Uber Gruber]

Looking at the Amazon.com sales rankings it would suggest SH3 sold better than SH4, something that is also reflected in the popularity of the SH forums here at subsim. Sh4 was not much of a jump from SH3, from both a technical and gameplay point of view, and as such it was never going to sell as well IMHO.

My question to the UBI business men then, is "Did SH3 make you more money ?"

If so then give us a leap...and you shall be rewarded/

Wolfpacks Now!:arrgh!:

[Sevrin]

I'm all for wolfpacks as long as the AI is decent.

What I'm afraid we'll get instead are U-boats boats cruising by us at high speed ignoring our presence, or randomly surfacing / diving for no reason, even in the middle of enemy traffic. I just don't see them behaving anywhere near the level of 'realism' we would want (or expect).

My guess is they'll be out there but won't do much or serve any real purpose other than eye candy.

If people think they're going to be able to stop and signal 'Thomsen' in the middle of the Atlantic I believe they're in for a major disappointment.

[Dave Kay]

I'm all for wolfpacks as long as the AI is decent.

What I'm afraid we'll get instead are U-boats boats cruising by us at high speed ignoring our presence, or randomly surfacing / diving for no reason, even in the middle of enemy traffic. I just don't see them behaving anywhere near the level of 'realism' we would want (or expect).

My guess is they'll be out there but won't do much or serve any real purpose other than eye candy.

If people think they're going to be able to stop and signal 'Thomsen' in the middle of the Atlantic I believe they're in for a major disappointment.

Your desire for decent AI (as is mine) is already out there in tens of hundreds of games and going strong. Just off the top of my head, and from the past decade, I point to an example; European Air War, which in my opinion, enemy and frendly AI were positively superb. Though its interface was a bit clunky, I could command my wingman to shoot up targets at will, as I chased down opprotune targets elsewhere and fattened my personal score. Even in the lowly Aces of The Deep, the AI Uboats in wolfpack were aggressive and stealthy enough to cheat me out of more than a few kills--- the fortunes of war, eh?

So, for the life of me I can't understand why more than a few forum posters' here continue this hand-wringing as to the plausability of sucessfully programming wolfpack AI into this already awesome sim.

To The DEVS: The games I previously mentioned were from the WIN95/98 heyday and without question, those simple AI's added immense playability and immersion to those games--- I still play them to tihis day.

THINK---- Microsoft Flight Simulator... as real as it gets? You bet! Personally, I've had many real-life flying experinces and MSFS is hands down the best flight-sim in its' genre with an AI that is almost too much to handle! Will SH5 become the best sub-sim of its' time?

Time will tell.

I submit: IMHO, it would be truly a sad day to see this newest release of the most remarkable sub-sim yet, become a lonely, first-person shooter game ala x-box/nintendo, without any player interaction/coordination with any friendly AI.

Personally, I believe that if wolfpacks are not part of SH5, Ubisoft may well lose many a loyal fan.

[Sevrin]

So, for the life of me I can't understand why more than a few forum posters' here continue this hand-wringing as to the plausability of sucessfully programming wolfpack AI into this already awesome sim.


It's not that I don't think it's possible, or that current technology limits such things, obviously they don't, as your examples show. I simply don't have a lot of faith that it will be reflected in this series, by this dev team.

The initial sub-standard state of Silent Hunter IV when it was released really soured me on Ubi's ability to deliver the goods. :-?

I'm not exactly sure what happened to the quality between SHIII and SHIV, but I'm weary of what the next title will be like.

Maybe I'm just overly cautious and pessimistic. :hmmm:

[Dave Kay]

It's not that I don't think it's possible, or that current technology limits such things, obviously they don't, as your examples show. I simply don't have a lot of faith that it will be reflected in this series, by this dev team.

The initial sub-standard state of Silent Hunter IV when it was released really soured me on Ubi's ability to deliver the goods. :-?

I'm not exactly sure what happened to the quality between SHIII and SHIV, but I'm weary of what the next title will be like.

Maybe I'm just overly cautious and pessimistic. :hmmm:

Regarding Doubt and Faith, I don't blame you there; am subject to same in many areas of life. But in this realtively small universe we live in here, I for one cannot help feeling that lobbying for inclusion of wolfpacks is worthy of all our collective efforts, if it is TRULY what the majority of serious sub-simmers wish.

Otherwise, left to the powers-to-be and corporate target-type marketing, e. g. 14-20 year olds, we serious sub-simmers may well be left with yet another version of Silent Hunter that leaves you alone again in your lonely Uboat, all by yourself, with all the eye-candy you could ever want... but no more substance than what you already had.

Find a way--- keep the faith!

[urfisch]

i bet a hundret thousand bucks...that at release the state of shv is far below our positive exspectations. and i bet another hundret thousand bucks, that there will be the need of a serious exterminator, to hunt down all the bugs...

:rotfl2:

[Uber Gruber]

I second that bet.....all we hear these days is "well that might be too hard" and "we'll try but you know, we're concentrating on some console type gimick" or "ideally yes, but alas no because our management team have all got BAs (Bachelor of Anything) and thus have as much knowledge and experience as a lesser spotted amazonian gnat".

Me hearties!:arrgh!:

[h.sie]

the devs of aces of the deep could make wolfpacks very well. 10 years ago. so ubi should be able to do that, too.

[Deutschland]

It's Essential!!

[JScones]

i bet a hundret thousand bucks...that at release the state of shv is far below our positive exspectations. and i bet another hundret thousand bucks, that there will be the need of a serious exterminator, to hunt down all the bugs...

:rotfl2:
It would be a foolish and naive man to take you up on that bet.

Unless they are just after a console game.

[THE_MASK]

I second that bet.....all we hear these days is "well that might be too hard" and "we'll try but you know, we're concentrating on some console type gimick" or "ideally yes, but alas no because our management team have all got BAs (Bachelor of Anything) and thus have as much knowledge and experience as a lesser spotted amazonian gnat".

Me hearties!:arrgh!:
http://maerean.3x.ro/iSite2/index.html :oops:

[Uber Gruber]

@Sober
Good comeback..:DL. Though I would consider his CV to be that of a Technical Team Lead rather than a "manager", i.e. the heads that make the biz decisions based on... god only knows!

That said, it is an Orwellian language.:o

[Méo]

As well as realistic convoy's (not all equally spaced, small difference in speed. not perfect in line)

100% agree, i want to see confusion among the convoy when under wolfpack attack, especially at night.

In SHIII the convoy started zigzag when attacked, every ship perfectly coordinated, even at night...

NO MORE PERFECT BEHAVIOUR!!! :damn:

[finchOU]

I dont trust any "hopefully, maybe, Should be...at somepoint..after release" statements from this Company as past statements have led to almost no major post production additions on past releases. All post production releases have been for patches to fix preproduction issues (IMHO). Most all of the major additions to the Sims have been by Modders.

I do trust that once when Company focuses on certain issues and includes inputs from various sites....they, for the most part, put out a pretty awesome product...which has been seen in the past as well.

[mookiemookie]

While I hate DLC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downloadable_content) as a rule, I would certainly support the addition of wolfpacks in that format in SH5 if they are not included at release. I would gladly pay a certain sum if their inclusion is really a time and money issue at Ubi.

[TarJak]

Gotta have em.

[Jimbuna]

Gotta have em.

I'll certainly second that http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

[HanSolo78]

Hm... since Ubi changed the release date to march 5th, I think we won´t get any wolfpacks again :wah::wah::mad:
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/8930/77081530.th.jpg (http://img710.imageshack.us/i/77081530.jpg/)
It is almost christmas and the devs will definitely have their holidays before beta tests and bugfixings in january starts. so they have about 6 weeks to do bugfixing in 2010 before dvd production starts. in this stage no features are usually introduced in a new game.

so.. hopefully the new sub AI allows subs to fire torps, dive and surface so that we can maybe wolfpacks on our own.

It is a shame.. they call SH5 "battle of atlantic" without the most important features... radio with BdU, Enigma and WOLFPACKS!

[Sky999]

It's 4 months until the release. In my honest opinion, If they havn't announced Silent Hunter 5 will have wolf packs then it's safe to say it won't.

I think it's ludicrous that we are in the fifth installment in this series and they still havn't implemented it...

[Webster]

It's 4 months until the release. In my honest opinion, If they havn't announced Silent Hunter 5 will have wolf packs then it's safe to say it won't.

I think it's ludicrous that we are in the fifth installment in this series and they still havn't implemented it...

well to start with there are 20 different versions of how people think wolfpacks have to work in the game when it comes to functionality and how they are implimented so any wolfpack design they would put in will leave people screaming OMG why is this and that done this way when its supposed to be that way, OMG you ruined the game.

yes wolfpacks are wolfpacks but try finding a concenses on exactly how they should work and be included in the game and you'll see it from the devs point of view, if they added them people still wouldnt be happy BUT it might just change the whole design and feel of how things function.

i would like wolfpacks in the game too but looking at it from ubi point of view, you are left with deciding on adding wolfpacks that you know people wont agree about how to do it right so your customers are NOT going to be satisfied no matter HOW you add them and then your stuck trying to adapt to a hundred different opinions on how it needs to be fixed just so people will stop bad mouthing the game and giving you bad press over it.

its a can of worms that i wouldnt go anywhere near. if i were a ubi suit i would tell the devs if they want do anything with them so they can be added to the game i would tell them to only open the door for modders to be able to do it but dont make it part of the game ubi releases so ubi doesnt have to make them work right.

or maybe they will follow the sh4 model and fix the game with patches first and then release an expansion you have to buy to get the wolfpacks added.

[JScones]

well to start with there are 20 different versions of how people think wolfpacks have to work in the game...
Give or take 2000, lol.

if i were a ubi suit i would tell the devs if they want do anything with them so they can be added to the game i would tell them to only open the door for modders to be able to do it but dont make it part of the game ubi releases so ubi doesnt have to make them work right.

or maybe they will follow the sh4 model and fix the game with patches first and then release an expansion you have to buy to get the wolfpacks added.
If I were a Ubi suit I'd be rubbing my hands together with glee knowing that if I left them out, I could gouge everyone another $30 or so with an expansion that just happens to include Wolfpacks and other features that should have been there to begin with. And I know I'd get away with it too, because all I'd have to do is post a few pretty screenshots and everyone would be hypnotised (must...buy...expansion...or...series...will...end ...). :yeah:

[IanC]

What's all this 'bout no wolfpacks? I'm a gonna start me a hunger strike I will! By golly, don't make me do it ubi!

[PL_Andrev]

The main problem with the wolfpack is the player or the AI needs to wait for other submarines in the region of the convoy.

Sincerely ask yourself - if you see a convoy will you wait 3 days until other submarines arrive? Will you wait for the signal "attack now"?

If you have SH3 or SH4 try to do it - shadow the convoy for 3 days.
Part of us love real and can do that. But others want to swim & attack only like in old good SH3.

[JU_88]

The main problem with the wolfpack is the player or the AI needs to wait for other submarines in the region of the convoy.

Sincerely ask yourself - if you see a convoy will you wait 3 days until other submarines arrive? Will you wait for the signal "attack now"?

If you have SH3 or SH4 try to do it - shadow the convoy for 3 days.
Part of us love real and can do that. But others want to swim & attack only like in old good SH3.

Part of the logistical puzzle the Devs are faced with no doubt.
While AI submarines are not at all difficult to implement, there is no denying that true non-scripted wolfpacks are gonna be very tricky indeed.
It will be intresting to see what the devs come up with....
But, I believe! :D

[TarJak]

The main problem with the wolfpack is the player or the AI needs to wait for other submarines in the region of the convoy.

Sincerely ask yourself - if you see a convoy will you wait 3 days until other submarines arrive? Will you wait for the signal "attack now"?

If you have SH3 or SH4 try to do it - shadow the convoy for 3 days.
Part of us love real and can do that. But others want to swim & attack only like in old good SH3.
And the way to discourage not following orders would be negative consequences. Renown or whatever rewards system is in place could be deducted if you don't follow orders from BdU.

[JScones]

The main problem with the wolfpack is the player or the AI needs to wait for other submarines in the region of the convoy.

Sincerely ask yourself - if you see a convoy will you wait 3 days until other submarines arrive? Will you wait for the signal "attack now"?

If you have SH3 or SH4 try to do it - shadow the convoy for 3 days.
Part of us love real and can do that. But others want to swim & attack only like in old good SH3.
That's a very good point. :up:

I bet there's a lot of people here who think that Wolfpacks "just happened". The concept of shadowing a convoy for days beforehand just out of visual range simply wouldn't enter into the equation. Even moreso when one learns that upping the TC too high results in a lost convoy.

I remember practicing shadowing in SH3...what a PITA! I was either too fast, too slow, too close, too far; basically never where I should be. And it got boring...fast.

Then there's the realisation that, after shadowing the convoy for so long and marking all the juicy targets, all the other u-boats have done the same, LOL!

Imagine the uproar from the "instant gratification" audience! :rotfl2:

[IanC]

I don't see what the big deal is. The arcade gamers simply won't wait for the wolfpack to form, while the 'realists' will wait x number of days, no problem.
Might even be a box to check for wolfpacks in the Realism options.
Aces of the Deep implemented them just fine, I don't see why it can't be done again.

[JScones]

Ah, but, ironically it's the arcade gamers that want Wolfpacks to form so that they can ravish convoys with impugnity (or so they think) and score big tonnage. Thus we have an interesting dichotomy...

So it will be interesting to see how, or indeed if, the devs attempt to please players--both arcardies and realism--with this feature.

I guess we'll find out next year sometime...either that or continue to speculate the same thing, over and over and over again (how many times now has it been posted that AoD had Wolfpacks so it can't be hard?).

[IanC]

Ah, but, ironically it's the arcade gamers that want Wolfpacks to form so that they can ravish convoys with impugnity (or so they think) and score big tonnage. Thus we have an interesting dichotomy...

So it will be interesting to see how, or indeed if, the devs attempt to please players--both arcardies and realism--with this feature.

I guess we'll find out next year sometime...either that or continue to speculate the same thing, over and over and over again (how many times now has it been posted that AoD had Wolfpacks so it can't be hard?).

I guess until some other posters stop saying it will be hard. :DL

[THE_MASK]

I thought AI subs is 99% on the way to wolfpacks .

[looney]

I much rather have realistic ship motion and sub handling than wolfpacks. Normally I attack with 2 hours of convoy spotted... and even faster if I use an AOB wheel.

[IanC]

I thought AI subs is 99% on the way to wolfpacks .

I would be happy with a bunch of AI subs out there. With a chance of one of them hitting my convoy. That would be better than nothing, and we wouldn't be fighting the battle of the atlantic alone.

[PL_Andrev]

I thought AI subs is 99% on the way to wolfpacks .

1) Enemy AI
- ships / convoy reaction (when German submarine or torpedo detected)
- enemy submarines
- reaction for player's patrol: recon, searching etc.

2) Friendly AI
- support for our uboat (fuel, torpedoes)
- help to attack (kriegsmarine, luftwaffe)
- other submarines

As you see AI is not only for wolfpack...

[Méo]

If you have SH3 or SH4 try to do it - shadow the convoy for 3 days.

Well, it's a new game, it could have new orders such as the ''shadow convoy'' order, so you could use time compression and set options when you want to be alerted (ex: destroyer coming within certain range, weather getting better/worse, etc.)

But others want to swim & attack only like in old good SH3.

Personally, I don't want SHV to be only a SHIII with better graphics, it needs to be lot more interactive with BDU.

''A massed target then, should be attacked by massed U-boats.''

- Dönitz

[PL_Andrev]

Personally, I don't want SHV to be only a SHIII with better graphics, it needs to be lot more interactive with BDU.

Me too, but there are players which love "find & attack" only. Please do not forget about them.
Compromise could be here, for example when play at normal+ level: lack of communication with the BdU results in a strong reduction of your renown. But will it be so?
I know that the dev team wants to do this game for people not interested in the submarine simulators too. Result is one "find and destroy" ...
(Or learn about bonuses on high level game).

But we are not dev team - they earn money for such ideas.
:DL

[TarJak]

The thing is in SHIII there is little point to shadowing a convoy unless you want to wait for the sun to go down before attacking or merely want to get into a better position to attack.

Will SHV provide the reason to do so? No-one here knows and it's pointless speculating on what it will without having something from the devs to go on.

But then we wouldn't have much to say in these threads at subsim would we?

[Méo]

Me too, but there are players which love "find & attack" only. Please do not forget about them.
Compromise could be here, for example when play at normal+ level: lack of communication with the BdU results in a strong reduction of your renown. But will it be so?
I know that the dev team wants to do this game for people not interested in the submarine simulators too. Result is one "find and destroy" ...
(Or learn about bonuses on high level game).

But we are not dev team - they earn money for such ideas.
:DL

I agree, not everyone would like to be constrained to BDU's orders. :-?

Personally, I would really like it :yep: (it would maybe add a strategical aspect to the game).

A compromise must be found.

Maybe it could be in realism settings, set how much interaction you want with BDU. :hmmm:

[IanC]

It's not any different than any other game really.
For example in SH3, an arcade gamer might not go to his assigned, far away, patrol grid. And so he won't, he'll sink a bunch of ships, hit escape to return to port and be happy. I don't see why we're scratching our heads, wondering how the devs will please the arcade gamer and find a compromise about wolfpacks.
As long as the game has nice graphics and cool explosions, they'll buy it anyways, realistic wolfpack procedures or not.

[Sgtmonkeynads]

We can already call for support. Click on base and drag icon to the desired area of patrol, so why can it not be the same for an A.I. sub.
We would have to figure out the rendevous point and shadow untill the first ship got hit then attack.
So why can't sh4 have wolf packs now? Just switch the ships in the support role to submerged subs? I know that its a huge "JUST" and is probably hard coded or something, other wise one would have done it all ready. It seems like they tried to do it, but ran into a problem and just settled with aircraft and surface ships for support.

[Méo]

It's not any different than any other game really.
For example in SH3, an arcade gamer might not go to his assigned, far away, patrol grid. And so he won't, he'll sink a bunch of ships, hit escape to return to port and be happy. I don't see why we're scratching our heads, wondering how the devs will please the arcade gamer and find a compromise about wolfpacks.
As long as the game has nice graphics and cool explosions, they'll buy it anyways, realistic wolfpack procedures or not.


Seems like common sense to me that you would be rewarded for how well you have completed your objectives.

Personally, I really don't want SH5 to be like SH3 where you can do whatever you want as long as you sink ships, why:

1) The problem with having too much freedom is that it lacks of any sense.
2) It's completly unrealistic.

This is from the Community Q&A in UBI forum:
While the player is still free to go as he pleases...Our focus is to create the perfect German submarine experience, with the highest detail current technology allows in real time. Silent Hunter is not about surface ships, is not about strategic decisions. What truly means Silent Hunter is life of a captain, his boat, his crew, a desperate battle for survival they themselves may not understand or agree with, sinking ships, live a drama on the high seas.Seems like a paradox to me. :hmmm:

They want to create the perfect German submarine experience but Germans commanders didn't have as much freedom as U.S. commanders did.

The reason behind all this that U-boats had to be coordinated with each other. (ex: form a line to intercept a convoy.)

I know most of people here already knew that but I'm just trying to be clear.

IMHO, SHV must have wolfpacks & interaction with BDU and the option to make it more simple for the casual gamer.

And I don't mind spending some bucks on an expansion if at the end we have ''the perfect German submarine experience''.


''A massed target then, should be attacked by massed U-boats.''

- Dönitz

[Sailor Steve]

Méo, I am in complete agreement with everything you just said. I've even pointed out more than once that I stay in my assigned grid for the whole patrol, the one concession being that toward the end, if I haven't seen anything, I might wander a little. If I'm in the North Sea I might go up and down the English east coast, but I never go to where I know the traffic is if that is nowhere near my patrol grid.

That said, Aces Of The Deep is considered by a lot of people to still have the best gameplay, and yet that game lets you go where you want.

So how should this be impemented? Obviously the renown system in SH3 didn't work, as you only had to stay in the grid 24 hours, and even that was easy to change. And people want to wander to where they can get the biggest scores (and have the most fun).

One idea I'm thinking of is to have certain criteria to continue your career. Low tonnage scores can get you in trouble. But so can not obeying orders. The problem there is that it would involve a kind of 'negative renown', and in real life the captain knew what his superiors thought of him, but there wasn't any scoreboard he could read. Or was there? Did his bosses tell him he was doing badly and better shape up? Did they give him reports he could read about himself? I don't know.

I agree that there is a problem, but how to fix it? Should there be an option that forces us to obey orders? If so, it should certainly be an option, as not everybody wants to play that way. And how should it work.

As usual, I see the questions, but I don't know the answers.

[Sailor Steve]

We can already call for support. Click on base and drag icon to the desired area of patrol, so why can it not be the same for an A.I. sub.
We would have to figure out the rendevous point and shadow untill the first ship got hit then attack.
So why can't sh4 have wolf packs now? Just switch the ships in the support role to submerged subs? I know that its a huge "JUST" and is probably hard coded or something, other wise one would have done it all ready. It seems like they tried to do it, but ran into a problem and just settled with aircraft and surface ships for support.
The problem I have with that scenario is that I don't think they could call for support in real life. I'm pretty sure that if they spotted a convoy and called it in BdU would look at the overall situation and say "Go ahead and attack", or "Shadow convoy until we send other uboats". Sometimes, as was well represented in Das Boot, you would get an order from BdU that U-XXX had called in a convoy report, and you would be the one rushing to join in, and sometimes you would miss the whole show due to bad weather, or you would be at the far side of your patrol grid and unable to get there in time, or not have enough fuel to run at full speed for the time it would take. And sometimes you would rush right in and join the fight.

During the short period when wolfpacks were actually in play you would be one of several boats cruising together ("together" being a relative term - you would probably never be in visual contact except when leaving port [hey, that would be cool to see]), and if one actually saw something you would almost certainly be part of the fun.

It has been pointed out before that most players think 'convoy' and want to be part of a coordinated attack like in a flight sim. The reality was that if they radioed each other the escorts would hear it as well, and know where the signal came from. Submerged of course they never had a clue what any of the other boats were doing, except for hearing or seeing a fight off in the distance. That said, the aftermath would be cool - getting radio messages from two boats claiming kills, one boat lamenting not getting anything, and one boat not reporting in.

But all that has to be programmed, and programmed properly. So what will we actually get, if anything? All we can do is wait and see.

[Méo]

I've even pointed out more than once that I stay in my assigned grid for the whole patrol, the one concession being that toward the end, if I haven't seen anything, I might wander a little. If I'm in the North Sea I might go up and down the English east coast, but I never go to where I know the traffic is if that is nowhere near my patrol grid.

I did exactly the same. :03:

That said, Aces Of The Deep is considered by a lot of people to still have the best gameplay, and yet that game lets you go where you want.

Sounds like an interesting game (I think Otto Kretschmer participated in it), I should maybe give it a try. :hmmm:

As usual, I see the questions, but I don't know the answers.

Very good points Steve, I don't know the answer neither...:-?

I don't see why we're scratching our heads

See, this is why we're scratching our heads. :D

[IanC]

See, this is why we're scratching our heads. :D

Well my point was simply that the casual or arcade gamer will do what he wants anyways. No matter what punishment he would get from the game/ BdU.
But come to think of it, there is another kind of gamer, not the ultra realist, not the arcade ADHD type, but someone in between...
But would that player really not be able to click on 'Shadow convoy, same speed and heading' and simply wait (using TC) for the wolfpack to form up?
If a player can't do that, then I'm classing him as an arcade gamer, not worthy of a head scratch. :DL

Edit: btw I'm talking about the 'how should the devs please all gamers concerning wolfpacks' argument.

[IanC]

Sounds like an interesting game (I think Otto Kretschmer participated in it), I should maybe give it a try. :hmmm:


Meo, if you need any help setting up AoD, just PM me.
The dynamic radio communications between the player, other U-boats and BdU, combined with wolfpacks, sends the immersion level through the roof! In no other subsim did I feel like I was part of a bigger picture. Hopefully SH5 will change this. :yep:

[mookiemookie]

Or was there? Did his bosses tell him he was doing badly and better shape up? Did they give him reports he could read about himself? I don't know.

From what I have read, Doenitz himself personally met with returning commanders for debriefing and to review the patrol reports. I assume it was the same with flotilla heads in other bases. So I believe they did indeed get immediate and direct feedback on how they were doing.

[rik007]

The only one to be hurt are enemy ships..

[mopedmoppel]

Its an absolute must... its the next level in the developement of the Silent Hunter Serie.
And... it´s a kind in a very older Game. Aces of the Deep. Why not in 2010 in Silent Hunter 5 ???

[PL_Andrev]

I do not remember well... Where were wolfoack in AotD?
In the single missions ONLY?

[iambecomelife]

I do not remember well... Where were wolfoack in AotD?
In the single missions ONLY?

No; there were definitely wolfpacks in AOD's career mode. You were most likely to see them between 1941-1945.

[finchOU]

Wow this thread wont die! :DL I know with all the anticipation of new game footage and any spec of info would be most peoples focus...but Learn from the past lest we make those mistakes in the future.

Any yes I had to do it....I'm riding Wolfpacks to the grave! :rotfl2:


OBTW...would people stop posting in the "New Video" thread...keep thinking something new is out! haha

cheers

[Leandros]

There is already a sort of wolfpack system in the game in the way that we do get observations from other u-boote and LW aircrafts.....from the BDU, too, I suppose. Whoever is giving those informations on convoys and single ships way out of our reach of observation.

[danurve]

I wouldn't mind having a go with being the contact boat and see how that plays out. But eventually I'll get an itch to sink some damn thing. Who wouldn't?

[urfisch]

There is already a sort of wolfpack system in the game in the way that we do get observations from other u-boote and LW aircrafts.....from the BDU, too, I suppose. Whoever is giving those informations on convoys and single ships way out of our reach of observation.

its coded stuff. if you would go there, you wouldnt find any uboat. but you are right, it is simulating uboat messages about contacts. anyway. wolfpacks are really a must. the uboatwar had the major strategy of acting in small teams - which was quite a success. only later in the war, it got impossible for the packs to be successful. on one hand the broken enigma code let the convois evade the packs and the uprising air-support from the hunter-groups caused many casualties even before the boats reached their packs.

but for a good uboat simulation, the interaction between boats is really a core game element. this was already known about 15 years ago...in aotd.

;)

[looney]

But as stated b4 there was harly any interaction between subs once they left base. At least no direct radio traffic. Only the messages picked up by the radioman. and the answers from BdU.

P.s. normally the different subs would only interact directly when they where receiving supplies midocean from eachother.

[Uber Gruber]

For me, UBIs attitude to WolfPacks in SH5 is an indication to their whole approach to SH5....a first person shooter with a console interface...a game instead of a sim.... SH4 version 2 etc......and in game footage so far seems to confirm this.

Perhapps SH6 will be better...

[IanC]

For me, UBIs attitude to WolfPacks in SH5 is an indication to their whole approach to SH5....a first person shooter with a console interface...a game instead of a sim.... SH4 version 2 etc......and in game footage so far seems to confirm this.

Perhapps SH6 will be better...

Dude, you're harshing all over my mellow.

[malkuth74]

The game won't have Wolfpacks, if it did they would be proudly announcing that as a feature since we have been asking for this for how many years now.

Since they are not saying anything about it, then it does not exist.

[tonyj]

...or they could be implementing wolfpacks but don't want to be bombarded with questions.

[Col. Caldwell]

...or they could be implementing wolfpacks but don't want to be bombarded with questions.

At this point, I think wolfpacks are wishful thinking.