Realistic ship maneuverability, please.

[karamazovnew]

I might've missed this in other posts so I want to make sure that the devs see this.

Ships in both SH3 and SH4 handle like X-wing fighters. Ships that stop and turn on a dime need to go... SH5 should allow realistic movement at least at higher difficulty settings. First of all, the engines require a LOT of coarsing into action. It can take full minutes to reverse engines from the Full Ahead setting. It takes miles of open sea to come to a full stop. If real ships behaved like the ones in the game, then we wouldn't have incidents like this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PrFkFnPt_o.
Also, on a pretty decent modern ship, moving the rudder from port to starboard takes around 30 seconds. But for the ship to start turning it takes much longer. The inertia is imense. Just take a look at this very modern warship http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW7T-IG7O4w&feature=fvw. A zigzaging ship moves almost in a straight line :o. You might think that this might make the game easier because ships wouldn't be able to avoid torpedoes, but the same (and other) rules would apply to your boat too, making it much less responsive and turning the game into an even slower and calculated affair. It might hurt MP games so a "Need For Speed" setting might be required far gamey-gamers :03:.

And there is one factor that really needs to be implemented in the game: WIND :|\\. This would have a huge impact on the game. Ships would slide into the wind to maintain their over-the-ground course, thus giving "false" AOB's. Each ship would behave differently because of the different "sail" surface. Also, ships tend to stabilze into/out of the wind, making it harder or easier for them to turn into the wind, depending on the position of the superstructure. A skilled Kaleun would take advantage of this by forcing the escorts to loose precious seconds while the sub can catch speed at Flank setting while remaining in the noise cone. And I might be wrong about this part, but seeing swarms of DD's circling like vultures in close proximity with eachother just doesn't look right.

Also, the roll of the ships had a very nice amplitude, even in calm waters, but it was about twice as fast as ships normally encounter.
Then there's the problem of wounded ships turning away from their sinking side, forcing the ship to list further. Actually, this has been discussed before and adressed in mods: why do ships sink in the first place? Because there is a certain ammount of weight (water) that they can take in before their total weight becomes greater than the buoyancy. It would be nice if the health bar of the ships would show this and not armor and hp or whatever :). And no captain would be crazy enough to wait until the water hits the deck before he gives the order to abandon ship. Meaning that some ships should count as "sunk" if the rate of the water intake would be far greater than the crew would be able to correct. A crew would be crazy not to abandon a big ship even at 50% "hp" :shucks: if there's a big enough gash in the hull.

[Takeda Shingen]

How about currents? That would be an even greater factor than the wind.

[Ritmeister]

I tend to agree wholeheartedly on this issue. The manuverability issue in SH3 and 4 was addressed as much as possible withing the limits by many talented MOdders. There were some issues that I gues were hard coded and unable to be accessed. This manuverability issue goes hand in hand with my earlier comments on ship damage and sinkings. See below my comment from another thread.


I would like them to comment on both the graphical enhancements and the mechanical aspects of either gunfire or torpedos on the targets.
This is what this sim is all about, right?

The stock torpedo damage effects in many ways, stock SH3 in particular were always regimented and controlled for the most part by hit points.( i.e. destroyer - ne hit, small freighter - one hit,large mercahnct - 2 hits, oil tanker one, maybe 2 hits or roll the dice to see if it goes up in a gigantic fireball) The mods made by the community in both SH3 and SH4 went miles to increase my feeling of immersion. Target speed, the fact the ship was empty or full, the critical areas with oil or fuel tanks, sometimes dangerous cargo; even an atack in heavy seas with water pouring in hatches and so forth. I think the basic terms was natural sinking mechanics.

I think ( not sure) that it was hard coded in both SH3 and 4 that ships just kept plowing ahead regardless of damage. How many dozen times have you seen a destroyer sink itself by plowing ahead relentlessly at 25 knots tils it burie the bow, almost the same with frieghters.


Its so exciting to see what at first appears a non critical hit fosters other damage, fires, explosions occuring sometime even an extended period after the attack. I think a lot of this was accomplished by the modders and an enhanced version of same be included in SH5.

I did read the comments about bows breaking off and other area and one or more components reaming afloat. This is realistic in limited cases I'm sure but shouldn't be an every other time deal. Otherwise it does tend toward arcade feel. Which is what we all DONT want.


ANything regarding damage or sinking that makes you feel like you've really attacked and done damage is an immersion buiklder. I'd have to say few or none of us want anything to do with arcade type performance.

[Webster]

lets not forget the fact that fire does not equate ongoing damage, i would like to see uncontrolled fires act like flooding and over time a ship sink from uncontrolled fires or put them out but seeing a destroyer with a blazing fire on deck cruise around for hours like nothings wrong is silly.

a big unfixed issue is that fire causes no damage to the ship, it is only eye candy

[java`s revenge]

.......and uncontrolled ships when you have gunned the cabin of your target.

[Rosencrantz]

Karamazonev is talking pretty much business, I think.


Greetings,
-RC-

[karamazovnew]

@Rosen: :salute:
@Webster, Java and Ritmester: I completely agree. Fire might not sink a ship but it would cause explosions and a very uncomfortable environment for the crew. Not to mention the cargo might arrive a bit crisp at its destination. I've always wondered why I have to separate the command section of a ship from its hull for the enemy captain to give a damn... however, the command room only contains remote access controls for rudder and engines. You'd need to hit the rudder control room below deck to cripple the ship.

How about currents? That would be an even greater factor than the wind.

I haven't forgotten about them, but currents have no effect on combat maneuvers.
Let me put it this way: manual targetting in SH becomes boring after a while. Dodging destroyers becomes obsolete once you learn how to attack from a distance with magnetic eels. Engaging 50+ convoys after that becomes more of a chore than the nerv-racking tension activity it should be. With the right tools it's barely a challenge. I'm one of those nerds that played MSFS with zero visibility, no autopilot and I used to slap myself for being more than 10 seconds late at my destination 500 miles away with 30+ waypoints in mountains at less than 200m above ground all the way. Unlike many, I'd love to have the sub simulated with all of its systems. I want the port hydraulic cillinder of the rudder system to break a leak because of stresses from the cold viscous oil and force me heat the oil and then switch to the other pump/cilinder assembly. I want each bulb to drain my power and to adjust the buoyancy every time the crew throws out the garbage or dumps the toilet tank. I'd like to feed the crew myself with a rusty fork and whipe their buts clean. I'd like to have water splash in my face and someone to rock my chair while I play SH. I want to read a 2000 page manual just to complete the Navigation Training Mission. This will never happen of course, but at least manual targetting should be more than just intercepting those trains (I mean ships) that start to zig-zag like imbecile sportcars once they smell Markus' soup. At least the attacks should be as realistic as possible. Having convoys that alter course every 30 minutes by up to 20 degrees, while at the same time being affected by wind and inertia, would transform manual targetting into an art form.

Currents will throw you off your intended course, but currents affect large areas of water so, in a normal attack, you wouldn't be able to notice their effects on ship maneuvers. They have almost no effect on turning the ship and they affect you the same way they affect any nearby convoy. I've heard horror stories of 10 knot currents in the Magellan Straights. I've heard stories of ships forced to drop both anchors and run at full speed into the wind+currents just to maintain position. I'd love to see them implemented in SH5, along with tides. It would make the ocean much more hazardous and infiltrating harbours would be AWESOME. But I have given up hope that we'll be able to simulate real non-gps navigation. That's not neccesarily a BAD thing, considering that the average Joe needs 3 semesters in naval school to understand how to do it. It wouldn't have been hard for the devs to lift up their sleeves and do it, all we needed was a proper star sky, a spherical world and overlapping matrixes of currents and tides, available from existing charts, as long as the scripts generating the position of the sub were ok. And a smart sistem of order queues for maintaning the bloody speed and compass course :haha:. Once in place, any navy student would've been able to just pick up his charts and practice with pen and paper math while the normal player would just pick the destination with the mouse as they do now (and will continue to do in SH5). We came so close to actually doing it right in SH4 that it pains me. Each small addition to the game, like the base clock from SH4 adds a lot of possibilities. The more they add now, the more we have to play with after.

Just to show you what ship simulator can be like: http://www.transas.com/5000/. Now trust me on this one, this is really hard stuff. Even with all the computers we now have, any officer must still be capable to take you from A to B with just a crayon and a ruller made from a folded A4 paper sheet. Having to also fight in those tin cans we call uboats with an entire fleet depth-charging you, while having to kill fellow sailors simply cannot be put into words. My respect for those brave men (on both sides) knows no bounds.

[Philipp_Thomsen]

NTPRO 5000

Holy crap... If SH5 water looks like that, we're in for a real treat! :rock:

[ETR3(SS)]

Unlike many, I'd love to have the sub simulated with all of its systems. I want the port hydraulic cillinder of the rudder system to break a leak because of stresses from the cold viscous oil and force me heat the oil and then switch to the other pump/cilinder assembly. I want each bulb to drain my power and to adjust the buoyancy every time the crew throws out the garbage or dumps the toilet tank. I'd like to feed the crew myself with a rusty fork and whipe their buts clean. I'd like to have water splash in my face and someone to rock my chair while I play SH. I want to read a 2000 page manual just to complete the Navigation Training Mission. You just need to join the navy and get it over with. :haha:

[thruster]

my biggest request is that damaged ships reduce speed as appropriate, hence become stragglers falling behind in the convoy.

[karamazovnew]

Already did ETR. But there aren't many VII's afloat these days in the merchant navy. And I wouldn't give up my spacious quarters anyway :haha:.

Thurster, this already happens in SH4 (not sure about SH3, I just sink them). For example, one one occasion I hit a Fuso BB with 2 eels. The entire task force was going at around 16 knots. The BB slowed to about 14 knots and lagged behind. A few hours later she was alone and I could finish her. BUT. She was the only big ship in the group. Why would the other 4 DDs abandon her like that?

[Webster]

The BB slowed to about 14 knots and lagged behind. A few hours later she was alone and I could finish her. BUT. She was the only big ship in the group. Why would the other 4 DDs abandon her like that?


i have found its all connected to the group leader, if the BB was the group leader then they stay with her but if another ship was the group leader they follow it and continue on the assigned course. any member of the group is considered expendable but the group leader isnt.

you would think the biggest ship is always the group leader but sometimes a task force has another ship as its leader.

also if you sink the group leader the other ships will often seem lost and mill around in random directions for a while

[Philipp_Thomsen]

I just don't want to see a ship stopping in the red light, waiting for the torpedos to cross in front of her, and then resume her course afterwards at full speed (by the way, that took 3 seconds flat).

SH3/SH4 ship's maneuverability is beyond ridiculous. Its a joke.

[MRV]

Fully agree with that. I sometimes felt myself like torpedoeing bypassing Trucks, not ships.....someone also mentioned earlier that DD's behave like cars in SH3/4, stopping, changing course and reversing like you normally do on a parking lot.

I also don't think it will make the game harder, just more realistic as a simlulation should be.

Let's just all hope that SH5 is not going the same way as IL2 Birds of Prey, which everyone was waiting for as sucessor of the realistic WW2 flightsim and which then surprisingly ended up being an arcade shooter released only for consoles.....

@Webster:

This is a bit of a limitation that would still go through as a feature....at least at night or in bad visibility ;-)

[Webster]

I just don't want to see a ship stopping in the red light, waiting for the torpedos to cross in front of her, and then resume her course afterwards at full speed (by the way, that took 3 seconds flat).

SH3/SH4 ship's maneuverability is beyond ridiculous. Its a joke.

it was bad with DD but to see a BB do it to you :o

it was just pathetic to see a BB moving at 12kts come to a to dry stop in less than 1 ship length to watch your torpedo pass and then start moving at 12kts again from a dry stop after moving less than 1 ship lengths distance.

i hope the devs have followed the work you and others have done to fix manuvering and can bring something better to sh5 right out of the box.

i think true life realistic starting and stopping times are too slow for a game setting but they should have a close to realistic feel in the way they move so maybe we'll see something between what we have and what is realistic

[THE_MASK]

There is no reason they couldnt have currents modelled other than priorities/time to impliment . But if there is currents then you need an anchor that works and the animations to drop and lower the anchor .

[Philipp_Thomsen]

If they dont fix it, thats the first thing Im fixing as a mod as soon as SH5 comes out.

After Sound Pack V4, obviously :arrgh!:

[Webster]

There is no reason they couldnt have currents modelled other than priorities/time to impliment . But if there is currents then you need an anchor that works and the animations to drop and lower the anchor .


theres a lot more to current then just adding some drift, because current is also resistance or lack there of for you to move and how it effects your speed and fuel.

near land currents get stronger or weaker depending on the side of the current your on then there is deep water currents and top water currents that move at different speeds and force based on the underwater features.

there also has to be increased fuel consumption when going against the current and the corresponding less fuel used going with the current.

heavy tides can force you to travel on the surface to make better time and reduce fuel use as well as make it impossible to set your sub on the bottom unless you are in a current free protected area.

adding currents can be a pandoras box of related issues :06:

currents are very complex if done correctly so the only question is if they do them to what extent are they going to add in all the surrounding effects the current should have on "everything" else in the game.

[THE_MASK]

I am sure tides wouldnt actually be modelled . Currents on the other hand might be easier as you would just implement the effect on the craft . Pure guess here LOL .

[karamazovnew]

http://www.oscar.noaa.gov/datadisplay/

As I've said, a map overlay of ocean current values shouldn't be hard to implement. It would be just like a LOD'ed height map with values added or subtracted from the vessel's speed. But they've already stated that, quote: "We investigated other projections as well, using a globe or specific maps of several locations (like they did in reality) but the drawbacks in terms of usability, freedom and understanding were too big to consider them further. Also, there is a number of technical problems associated to other geographical projections, which we chose not to tackle for now." when asked about the spherical map.
Currents would have a very nice impact on real navigation but... we won't have real navigation in SH5 :wah:. Currents would also have an effect on the convoy paths and, more important, on weather formations. I don't imagine them tackling that... Maybe in Silent Hunter 6 Professional (Approved by the German Navy for actual training) coming soon in 2015 :rotfl2: