Should U-Boat Training/Exams Be made Compulsory

[Lord Justice]

Realism gents, Earn it. Iam a staunch supporter that each individual in want of uboat command should attend training school and pass minimal exams. (Perhaps this is the unlockable feature) Why should one simply side step this feature then go on to serve in a flotilla with kaleuns and crew members alike that are maybe already trained or experienced hands. Then expect the right to command a sub, and start a career.!! In short, why should crap pass through to be approved command, and the right to fight with an expensive sub in the so called front line? alongside chaps that have earned their right to be there, and that have been trained to a minimum standard. Starting Renown, and exam standards/ results could be implemented through easy, med, hard, or 0-100 realism setting. Then even the casual newbie has the right, example: 0 percent realism set, or easy level for exam school, end result pass but with less renown, thus allowing to set sail with some experience. We talk and argue and nic pick about lots of trivial ideas with the extra realism, however this is a little important fact we may have missed. Even If one has to return for exam on diffrent dates for diffrent schools, ie torpedo, guns, etc as long as their is some kind of bare minimum required for duty, i for one would not like a new commander to come to my flotilla and expect equal treatment albeit he may not have the pick of the bunch, or best assigned crew to his boat, where on the otherhand i trained hard to have my place. Thankyou

[Apocal]

I vote no. Who cares if someone else loses fifty boats learning just to maneuver out of harbor? Since, unlike real life, nobody is going to actually die.

[mookiemookie]

I vote no. U-boat training school in Flensberg-Murwick in 1940 =/= Silent Hunter 5 training missions.

I'm a vet of the series. I know how to click on the compass to steer my boat and hit the "d" key in order to dive. Forcing me to go through a training mission every time I wanted to start a new career would irk me.

Plus, as game players, we have the benefit of a do-over in order to learn how things work, whereas IRL there are no second chances.

[Sailor Steve]

No. I enjoy playing out the training missions, as they are helpful, and the single missions, as they are fun. But if someone pays good money for a game, no matter how realistic, they shouldn't have to pass someone else's test just to play it. You can work on the training if want, and I probably will, but how someone actually goes about it his business, and no one else's.

[Stealth Hunter]

Yes and no. I feel that if you complete training, you should get some kind of reward or bonus. If you don't want to, that's fine. You can still play. It's not a necessity. Anyway- how would you implement it? Just curious.

[Méo]

Voted yes, but not sure about the compulsory thing.

The thing is that it could be interesting to have some kind of animation (or something) of a training like U-boats commanders had in real life.


If you take a look at the second half of this video where it shows a bit of a commander's training. (Sorry I didn't find it in english) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTNG2ZnYM5E

When you see the big map where they step on it, it says:

- “Strategy and tactic course reserved to future commanders”

- “In the instruction room, study with periscope of a mock-up representing a convoy”

- “After months of studying, first sailing to the high seas”


I would be very surprised if it would be in the game, nevertheless it could be interesting, it would add to the feeling of being in the thirties... :yep:

[Lord Justice]

Voted yes, but not sure about the compulsory thing.

The thing is that it could be interesting to have some kind of animation (or something) of a training like U-boats commanders had in real life.





I would be very surprised if it would be in the game, nevertheless it could be interesting, it would add to the feeling of being in the thirties... :yep: would not expect it in sim now at this stage, liked the film reel :up:

[Randomizer]

No way. Will have paid my money for SH5 and have paid my dues in Silent Service, Silent Service 2, AotD, SH1, SH2, SH3, SH4, Fast Attack and 680(I) Hunter Killer. I see no reason to have to prove myself to the comic book that is likely to be SH5.
************************************************** ******
Insert out of context movie line purported to be profound quote from somebody supposedly famous.

[rik007]

No. I'm a veteran already. When you reinstall the game or when you have multiple installs you have to do it al over again which is boring.

[GoldenRivet]

I voted yes... but yes and no is how i really feel.

Yes because - if people would take their time to use the training missions to gain a fair level of proficiency and competency they would find themselves more successful on actual patrol.

No because - you can alienate a lot of casual gamers by doing it this way.

I think that if you set your realism settings above 90%, then you should have to go through the U-boat training missions and there would be a minimum pass rate on each mission. and a minimum total pass rate (so you could perform poorly on one or more sessions but still pass.)

for ultimate realism, you would be assigned to a port and a sub type based on your overall performance.

in other words

If minimum passing is 70% and you scored...

70-80% you would be assigned to a Type II until you proved yourself in combat and earned the ability to transfer to a new boat.

81%-90% you would be assigned to a VII

91%-100% you could choose your own command and base.

just something to think about... i think you could implement it into the career mode without ruffling feathers.

but like i said, forcing a player to complete training missions to a certain degree of proficiency is only going to alienate more casual players.

[Méo]

70-80% you would be assigned to a Type II until you proved yourself in combat and earned the ability to transfer to a new boat.

81%-90% you would be assigned to a VII

91%-100% you could choose your own command and base.

I really like the idea.

It would be worth to put a real effort in it.

This idea paired with the fact that your crew's morale will be based on your actions would be great.

It would add more sense to give everything you got, the best you do, the higher your crew's morale will be and the more choice you would have in boats types & flotilla.

Let's just hope they see it or hope they thought about it before you. :03:

[Webster]

i'm in the yes and no mind set, no it shouldnt be required for you to get a command but yes it should determine if you get the worst boat in the fleet or a sub in good shape based on your skill and proficiency level that shows you earned the right to be trusted with a good boat

[THE_MASK]

Make it an option .

[karamazovnew]

A simple "Since this is your first ever career, do you want to start with the training misions?" dialog box should be enough. Although I hope that this time they will be better documented and more fun. The ones in all major mods were a blast.

[JScones]

I vote no. U-boat training school in Flensberg-Murwick in 1940 =/= Silent Hunter 5 training missions.

I'm a vet of the series. I know how to click on the compass to steer my boat and hit the "d" key in order to dive. Forcing me to go through a training mission every time I wanted to start a new career would irk me.

Plus, as game players, we have the benefit of a do-over in order to learn how things work, whereas IRL there are no second chances.
:yep: Exactly my thoughts.

I do like how SH3 handles it - optional but with a renown bonus as an incentive. Do the training missions once and the renown earned carries forward through all careers.

[Kaleun_Endrass]

I know how to click on the compass to steer my boat and hit the "d" key in order to dive.
SH5 having first person style view, maybe it also have FPS like controls. It would be very useless to run against the right wall in order to dive...
For the very first career it's not a waste of time I think to go through a small and simple tutorial mission to get familiar with the controls, the boat and all the new features of the game. That's why I voted with yes.

[Undefined]

Yes because i am a noob :D

[looney]

:yep: Exactly my thoughts.

I do like how SH3 handles it - optional but with a renown bonus as an incentive. Do the training missions once and the renown earned carries forward through all careers.

Agreed I liked the SH3 way also. Heck you could mod the file if you absolutely didn't want to do the training.

I actually missed it in SH4 not to mention the training mission for the germans

[Torplexed]

I vote no. It would be cheating as I didn't attend the months at the Naval Academy either.

[flakmonkey]

I vote no, i earn my right to command when i buy the game, i dont want some stupid tutorial mission to say "no youre not good enough to play the game you just bought!"

It would be fine as an option, like the academy missions in previous games, and i would gladly go through some virtual training and take tests, but to make it compulsary is just plain dumb and would put a lot of people off.:down:

[Ritmeister]

Voted No, but it would be an intersting one of the "features" that gives more renown or access to better crew selection when starting a career.

[Boris]

What are you talking about??? Experienced hands, expensive sub, chaps that have earned their right to be there? They haven't earned anything, they just do what the devs have scripted for them to do. I hate to break it to you, but the guys you have been spending your long patrols with on SH3 and 4, those friends you've come to know and love... they aren't real people at all, but nothing but data in a machine! It probably comes as a shock, but it's true! As real as Silent Hunter games may seem, it's just an elaborate computer programme designed to make you think you're actually a German U-Boat captain in WW2. In actuality your sub is worth nothing, your crew are nothing but robots, the tonnage you sink is not real, and the BdU that you get your orders from is not real. Your entire sense of reality may be shattered now, but fret not, just think of the awesome power this gives you. Knowing that it's all not real, you can be much more powerful than you have ever imagined... death means nothing to you now... you can perform the most daring raids concievable without fear... and even if you happen to be destroyed... you will remain, and may patrol again. And if this is all too hard to believe... here's the big one... you can do this all, patrol the seas, sinking ships, calculating difficult torpedo solutions... to live the life of a U-Boat commander... all of this, can be done with no formal training whatsover. Totally amazing, but 100% true.

[sharkbit]

I voted no.
Like people have said-it is only a game and I payed my money for it and I can play it any way I like. I don't care if someone is totally new to a submarine sim, they shouldn't be forced to go thru some make believe exam to play the game they paid for. If they want to learn on the go, more power to them.

I do agree however, that if you complete the exams, you should get some sort of bonus. Something like Goldenrivet posted would be cool.

[Boris]

The game will "always" be just a game (untill technology advances), but you're missing the whole point of simulation together with immerse factor. I assume for most people who chooses to play simulations, links with reality is very important. I don't know why you chose to degrade eveything like that. But you instantly reminded me of a kid who just enjoys shoot-em-up arcade style of games. And really the one who never gives any mature valuation to SH as a simulation. This is sad..

While I do enjoy the odd FPS game, when I play SH games I adhere to the more hardcore simming croud. I have nothing against a good dose of realism.
But as you said yourself, we "choose" to play simulations, and so why shouldn't the training missions be a choice.
I was somewhat amused by the OP's "staunch" view on this subject and chose to poke a little fun, nothing more.

On a sidenote: Is it really more mature to play hardcore sims than casual shoot-em-ups? Just think about how worked up so many of us get over the issues in and around this game :)

[Hitman]

Oh ... might be this what we must unlock in the game? :DL

[Lord Justice]

I was somewhat amused by the OP's "staunch" view on this subject and chose to poke a little fun, nothing more.

On a sidenote: Is it really more mature to play hardcore sims than casual shoot-em-ups? Just think about how worked up so many of us get over the issues in and around this game :) Sir Boris, clearly you are a educated man with an exceptionally sharp mind and wit, Not. You act like a school boy, and choose to flout, or attempt to dish a verbal beating to ones post, with nothing but accusations in a unscrupulos manner, come come pull yourself together man. Futhermore are disrespectfull toward fellow simmers here by your wording. Call yourself a u boat captain? a loyal subject to the sub sim community? :rotfl2:your verbal insults are the last refuge of a scoundrel, Clearly by far you have a simple mind in the art of taking simmers serious, and perhaps sir you would like a lesson on the rules of gentry? Yor unwanted remarks are nothing more than a pitiful fellow hell bent on ransacking ones post, nothing but a mischevous rascal, i ask you humbly appologise to me and the subsim community and redress your comments. gooday:)

[Sailor Steve]

This is what I want. I want this game to be different, not like thousand of others where every player can feel like he's the king of the world even if he paid the bloody money for it!
I don't feel like I'm king of the world, and it's quite rude for you to accuse me of that. I play at the highest level I'm comfortable with, but I don't brag about my accomplishments, and in fact am quite critical of those who do, especially when it's obvious they're playing at the easiest levels.

Do you also want a sim with no easy levels? The only level available is 100% hardcore manual everything? You'll be the only one buying it.

...oh I payed MY money I want it all however I want" is sooooo Pro-Capitalisticly American.
Since I'm the one you're quoting I assume I'm the one that is aimed at. And you're wrong. At the bottom it's a game. It's designed to be played and enjoyed. Are you saying that I should pay money to play your way, and your way only.

Getting everything in easy way is so boring. For those with no feeling of intrigue I guess..Well I'm just happy I'm not that type of person :)
But as I said before. As long as market dictates conditions to Dev, Arcade lovers will not be left out in one way or another.. So be happy.
Now you have to insult everyone who disagrees with you? Yes, getting everything the easy way is boring. But not everyone is you, and being told you have to pass a test just to play a game is arrogant and insulting.

[Sailor Steve]

Sir Boris, clearly you are a educated man with an exceptionally sharp mind and wit, Not. You act like a school boy, and choose to flout, or attempt to dish a verbal beating to ones post, with nothing but accusations in a unscrupulos manner, come come pull yourself together man.
Actually he did nothing of the kind. He asked a question, albeit a rhetorical one. I don't completely agree with him, but he raises a valid point.

You, on the other hand, write like that schoolboy you compared him to.

Futhermore are disrespectfull toward fellow simmers here by your wording.
How so? His argument is every bit as valid as yours.

Call yourself a u boat captain? a loyal subject to the sub sim community? :rotfl2:
That's the second time you've tried to demean someone by telling him he doesn't deserve that distinction. Are you a u-boat captain? Have you ever served on a ship? No, whatever your background might be, in this context you are a gamer, nothing more. The same is true for all of us, even those who have actually served on a real submarine.

your verbal insults are the last refuge of a scoundrel, Clearly by far you have a simple mind in the art of taking simmers serious, and perhaps sir you would like a lesson on the rules of gentry? Yor unwanted remarks are nothing more than a pitiful fellow hell bent on ransacking ones post, nothing but a mischevous rascal, i ask you humbly appologise to me and the subsim community and redress your comments. gooday:)
It is you who have taken this to the level of insult, and an apology is the last thing Boris owes you or anyone. I will apologise for stooping to your level, but that has to be one of most childish posts I've ever seen on these boards.

[Egan]

Voted a big fat 'no'. I consider SH1, SH2, SH3, SH4, AOTD and several modern sub/naval sims to be ample proof of my 'Right to Command.'

See, the thing is, I don't actually want to join the KM, I just want to play a sim about WW2 era submarines.....:D...its the same reason I can't be bothered with those arguments about whether we should even be allowed to save or not (remember them? I haven't seen one for SH5 yet.)

To be honest, I can't imagine that SH5 is going to be different enough to previous games to merit me playing a training campaign as opposed to a real one. And to be even more honest I can't imagine that the rest of the game - as good as I'm sure it is - is going to be 'realistic' enough to warrant the inclusion of such a totalitarian feature.

The only way I'd play even an optional training campaign would be if it did something that has never been done before in a subsim - perhaps being part of a crew in one of the boats that nosed around Biscay waters during the Spanish Civil War (or am I imagining that?) and learning from the Old Man would be a fun and interesting way to do it but I can't be bothered with yet another 'press this button then go here' type affair. Of course, if Ubisoft were going to take me to a prewar cabaret club in Hamburg to celebrate my commission.....well..that might put a different spin on things.

[Lord Justice]

It is you who have taken this to the level of insult, and an apology is the last thing Boris owes you or anyone. I will apologise for stooping to your level, but that has to be one of most childish posts I've ever seen on these boards.Sir Sailor Steve, charmed iam sure, so many posts i could say are childish, ex soup, iam mean really, cmon do u jest ? or you just like to hear your voice? are you a referee? personally i found his points insulting and now you sir are slating! why, but one is not going to stoop to your level by being rude, this i assure you of, i do not wish to extenuate the matter any further with you, nor do i wish to speak to you again until you regain your senses, now my learner friend iask you take leave to another post if you please, but remember to bow on your way out. gooday

[Sailor Steve]

Wow looks like we have a leveller here. :) SS, with all respect I haven't addressed any of my posts to you personaly am I ?
You did address the "payed my money" comment, and I was the one who made it in the first place. And you really cut into Sharkbit for expressing the same opinions I did, which to me is the same thing.

As I said, I will play all the tutorials at least once, but personally I don't see how what you suggest adds to the realism. Taking that to it's logical extreme, I suppose that the tutorial and exam would have to be the same as the real ones were, and the game would have to require you to not only pass the exams, but also to spend several months in the classroom before you would even be allowed to take them.

How realistically do you really play. How about if you die the game shuts down and you're never allowed to play it again? That would be realistic (at least it wouldn't kill you, I would hope). Should we be forced to play all patrols in real time? That has been proposed before, but most of us have jobs and such, so we can't play that way all the time. Others claim they leave the game running while they go to work, but real captains don't leave the sub and go to work.

Getting the maximum realistic feel from the sim is something I support wholeheartedly, but being forced to jump through hoops reflecting someone elses idea of realism is attempted dictatorship, nothing less.

Play the Academy all you want. I will too. Just don't try to force me to play your way in the name of 'Realism'.

[Sailor Steve]

Sir Sailor Steve
First off, I'm an American - we don't do titles here. And if we did, I've never been knighted, so the appelation 'Sir' would not apply to me.

Second, you need to explain exactly what it was that 'insulted' you, in detail. As I see it the only insult given was by his disagreeing with you. Your 'insult', on the other hand, extended to telling people they don't deserve to be a u-boat captain if they don't want to be forced to play the way you do. And my point is valid: none of us are u-boat captains, we're only pretending to be.

Third, once a thread is started anyone can post there all they want. It's usually considered polite to stick to the topic, though everyone wanders from that on ocassion, myself included.

Speaking of the topic, which you started, why don't you address the subject at hand? Padvotke and I are disagreeing quite vehemently, but at least he's arguing the point.

[Boris]

Sir Sailor Steve, charmed iam sure, so many posts i could say are childish, ex soup, iam mean really, cmon do u jest ? or you just like to hear your voice? are you a referee? personally i found his points insulting and now you sir are slating! why, but one is not going to stoop to your level by being rude, this i assure you of, i do not wish to extenuate the matter any further with you, nor do i wish to speak to you again until you regain your senses, now my learner friend iask you take leave to another post if you please, but remember to bow on your way out. gooday

Dude, your writing is totally gay... now how's that for childish :D

Seriously, lighten up!

[Webster]

ENOUGH OF THIS ! :timeout:


this thread is about training exams, can we please talk about that?

EDIT: correction

No, it's about whether we should be forced to pass them before we can play the game. The key word in both is 'Compulsory'.

thank you

[Sailor Steve]

You do the trainings untill you successfully pass the exams if not you keep practising.
And if I never pass? I'm not very good with advanced math, and manual targetting requires that.

When\if you die in game that does not mean you have to commit suicide
I didn't suggest that. But if you're going to insist on forced realism, shouldn't you insist on it in all categories? Why not have the game force you to not start a new career for a month?

:)Real time playing is also not necessary.
Again, why not? If the game is going to force me to be realistic, why only in one area? My point is that you want not only to play realistically, but you want to force others to do so as well.

There would also be cool if there would be an option to make hardcore navigation. Maybe in SH5 this will come to life.
I completely agree, manual navigation would be awesome. But, as you said, as an option.

[Sailor Steve]

ENOUGH OF THIS ! :timeout:


this thread is about training exams, can we please talk about that?



thank you

No, it's about whether we should be forced to pass them before we can play the game. Reread the first post. And the thread title. The key word in both is 'Compulsory'.

[Randomizer]

Changed my mind and think that all the training should be compulsory for all careers all the time. This should be hard coded and un-moddable.

Also there should be a compulsory test for stellar constellation recognition and a course in spherical trigonometry before you can navigate your boat anywhere.

Add on compulsory leadership training and a tour as a divisional officer in surface ships before you can take the U-Boat command tests. Don't forget the physics of bouyancy, hydrodynamics and diesel mechanics 101 as well.

All the above represent "realistic" training but impostion of any requirements other that shelling out the purchase price is total crap in any game context.

Compulsory training for SH5 is not the worst idea out there but it will do until the next dumb scheme that the self-styled realism gods wish to inflict on the community. Sigh...

[Webster]

at what point did someone think it was a good idea to have a game you buy NOT allow you to play it until you jump through hoops and pass some silly test? :nope:


if you want to have something like that which will be able to determine your skill level and type of boat you start with and what area your base starts in then i can see that being a nice feature as long as it can be turned off like any other realism setting but please dont tell me it makes any sense that i cant play a game i bought because of some sort of realism setting decides im not ready yet.

[Takeda Shingen]

http://www.kittywompus.com/macadamia/images/20040622/small-squirrel.jpg

[GoldenRivet]

this thread; well some of it anyhow, reminds me of an old Tandy 1000 game i used to play called "OCEAN RANGER" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXGehKBSEHg) (quite probably the first naval sim i ever played)

the object of the game - you were the commander of a missile boat / Destroyer and once the game started you had to enter a security clearance code before you could play the game.

Enter the wrong code and the game wouldnt let you play.

For example... in the game book there would be a "security codes" section

if the computer Displayed the word "VIRGINIA" you would have to enter "COYOTE" or the computer would display the word "HORSE" and you would have to enter the word "TIDAL" or some other series of letters or numbers.

you enter the word by typing it.

if you lost the booklet, or didnt write the codes down in a safe place... you were screwed and basically couldn't play the game at all.

I played the game so much that a few of the codes i could remember, but most of them i could not.

so... if i guessed the wrong code, i would have to restart the game and hope it would display a word i knew the appropriate response to.

this was aggravating, it served no purpose, and drove me quite insane.

i would imagine that to the casual player... having to complete training before every career would prove to be a similar headache. :yep:

[gordonmull]

Nah. Big switch off for me.

It's something that's a bit fun the first time round but if i've already sat it umpteen times then I can't be bothered being forced to do it all over again if I have to reinstall (and if SH3's anything to go by theere will be no shortage of that). Personally I hate the exam system in SH3 and praise the GWX crew for changing it so you only have to pass one to get the renown bonus.

[mookiemookie]

this was aggravating, it served no purpose, and drove me quite insane.

Oh sure it served a purpose at the time. It was an early form of anti-piracy. You'd be less tempted to "copy that floppy" if you didn't have the accompanying booklet with the activation code in it. :know:

[GoldenRivet]

Oh sure it served a purpose at the time. It was an early form of anti-piracy. You'd be less tempted to "copy that floppy" if you didn't have the accompanying booklet with the activation code in it. :know:

But... couldnt you just copy the floppy and write down the codes on a slip of decal paper and affix it to the disk? :hmmm:

Honestly there was only like 10 matching codes.

I could understand your thinking if it were say... 1,000 codes... but only 10?

you make a good point... im just not sure how functional this would have been as a software protection back in 1988

[mookiemookie]

you make a good point... im just not sure how functional this would have been as a software protection back in 1988

It was an early attempt. One of the first stabs at getting creative with copy protection:

Fortunately, the games industry is creative, and thus it was that the offline copy protection was born and flourished. One of its most prevalent forms was an in-game quiz that would require gamers to refer to the manual for specific information - you'd be asked, for example, to enter the third word in the fourth paragraph on page 14. Some titles took a punishing approach to this little Q & A: SSI's Star Command required a documentation check prior to each in-game save, while Master of Orion would respond to a failed manual check by gradually becoming so difficult that it was impossible to win. Perhaps the most notorious example of this method is Sierra's King's Quest III, in which lengthy passages of potion recipes and other information had to be reproduced from the manual. One typo, and you were greeted with a "Game Over" screen.

http://www.next-gen.biz/features/a-history-copy-protection?page=0%2C0

[GoldenRivet]

It was an early attempt. One of the first stabs at getting creative with copy protection:

Oh quite clearly it was an early attempt.

just IMHO... not a very good one, If i had written the codes down, i could have given them to anyone to copy :doh:

but what about legitimate customers such as my 9 year old self who lose their booklets? (MY GOD was that really 21 years ago???!?!?!?!)

doomed to never be able to play the game unless they successfully guess the code :haha:

sucks.

the comparison i'm trying to make... is simple though.

casual gamers dont want to go through the learning processes involved in today's games - no matter how complex they might be.

casual gamers want to jump in and start shooting... and adding a feature like "required training exams" will undoubtedly alienate a fair percentage of such customers.

for that reason, its my opinion that training levels would not be made compulsory

however, i think they should be made compulsary for those players who crank up the realism setting beyond "X"%

[Randomizer]

however, i think they should be made compulsary for those players who crank up the realism setting beyond "X"%

Fair ball but only if all external views not based on the either the deck or conning tower and all event camera views, torpedo views and victim views are completely disabled.

[gimpy117]

I dunno i'd feel bad if I never made the cut.

[Sailor Steve]

Real time playing is for jobless people ok ? :) If you have a job or studying that means you have an excuse, don't think about it too much :)
So it's a good thing if I have to pass your version of 'Realistic', but a bad thing for you to have to pass someone else's?

What this really comes down to is some people wanting to force others to play their way. As an option it's fine. As a requirement? I have enough tyranny in my life from real sources. I don't need to be dictated to by a game.

@ Randomizer: Brilliant!:rock:

[JScones]

this thread; well some of it anyhow, reminds me of an old Tandy 1000 game i used to play called "OCEAN RANGER" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXGehKBSEHg) (quite probably the first naval sim i ever played)

the object of the game - you were the commander of a missile boat / Destroyer and once the game started you had to enter a security clearance code before you could play the game.

Enter the wrong code and the game wouldnt let you play.

For example... in the game book there would be a "security codes" section

if the computer Displayed the word "VIRGINIA" you would have to enter "COYOTE" or the computer would display the word "HORSE" and you would have to enter the word "TIDAL" or some other series of letters or numbers.

you enter the word by typing it.

if you lost the booklet, or didnt write the codes down in a safe place... you were screwed and basically couldn't play the game at all.

I played the game so much that a few of the codes i could remember, but most of them i could not.

so... if i guessed the wrong code, i would have to restart the game and hope it would display a word i knew the appropriate response to.

this was aggravating, it served no purpose, and drove me quite insane.

i would imagine that to the casual player... having to complete training before every career would prove to be a similar headache. :yep:
I remember practically every Microprose game released in the 1980's had a similar form of anti piracy. I especially remember the ship recognition that was required with Silent Service.

[JScones]

I can just imagine:

SH5: "Unfortunately you have failed training. Game aborted."

Best $80 ever spent, LOL! :rotfl2:

[Sailor Steve]

I I especially remember the ship recognition that was required with Silent Service.
:yep:

"Name the destroyer on page 15."

[JScones]

Yeah, with a choice from four little white blocky ship silhouettes. There was one in particular that I always got wrong...a Japanese Destroyer type if I'm not mistaken.

Ah, those were the days.

[Decoman]

I voted "yes", because of the potential to teach certain concepts to the player, that probably is helpful for playing the game.

Just like being tossed into a pc flight simulator, probably is no fun if you have no grasp on the basics.

Unfortunately, this kind of "training" might reveal where the game is limited in scope, in terms of being a realistic simulation.

[looney]

this thread; well some of it anyhow, reminds me of an old Tandy 1000 game i used to play called "OCEAN RANGER" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXGehKBSEHg) (quite probably the first naval sim i ever played)

the object of the game - you were the commander of a missile boat / Destroyer and once the game started you had to enter a security clearance code before you could play the game.

Enter the wrong code and the game wouldnt let you play.

For example... in the game book there would be a "security codes" section

if the computer Displayed the word "VIRGINIA" you would have to enter "COYOTE" or the computer would display the word "HORSE" and you would have to enter the word "TIDAL" or some other series of letters or numbers.

you enter the word by typing it.

if you lost the booklet, or didnt write the codes down in a safe place... you were screwed and basically couldn't play the game at all.

I played the game so much that a few of the codes i could remember, but most of them i could not.

so... if i guessed the wrong code, i would have to restart the game and hope it would display a word i knew the appropriate response to.

this was aggravating, it served no purpose, and drove me quite insane.

i would imagine that to the casual player... having to complete training before every career would prove to be a similar headache. :yep:

SH2 (my 1st naval sim) had a similar feature as a copy protection. You had to id the ship shown. Pirates gold you had to find the correct pirate with his flag. I sincerely hope they don't put such an old and bad system in BRRRRRRR

[Egan]

Relax, don't **** your underwear because of Exams :) you showed quite clear you scared like hell of them. But if you affraid to take challenges in life or games this is only yours bloody lack of character not mine :)

Not that Steve needs my help in defending himself from the likes of you but that crossed the line mate. Before you attack him again with your silly, arrogant and deeply insulting little digs perhaps you should find out something about him as a man and why he is held in such very, very high esteem around here. The guy's got character to spare. Perhaps if your nice to him he'd lend you some.

Oh, by the way, If you need a virtual exam in a computer game to instill some pride or character in yourself perhaps you should think about making some serious changes to your life.

[Ritmeister]

[quote=WEBSTER;1219300]ENOUGH OF THIS ! :timeout:


+1

Thank you.:salute:

[Egan]

I see you already found something about him as a man. I wonder which one of you was a passive one last night ? =]]
And yes I wouldn't expect better advice from such narrow minded life form like you Egan =]

Well, If that's true at least we were both getting some. Really, calling us gay? How should I respond, by telling my mummy on you? Pfft.

People who make primary school level quasi homophobic comments shouldn't really accusing others of narrow mindedness, should they?

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot: emoticons make everything better these days, don't they? :) there you go.

I like you; you're like the retarded chimp I never had....sigh...

[Reece]

@ Padvotke, your stepping on shaky ground mate, could you please step back for awhile or you may find yourself in the brig!!:oops:

[Kaleun_Endrass]

I have no clue why you said he has to be respected more than other members here
As far as I followed the topic right, since december the 15th it's you who doesn't respect him at all...

[IanC]

The most original copy protection I remember was with Leaderboard for the Atari 800xl, around 1985. We had to plug in a 'protection device' in the joystick port 2...

[TigerOmega]

Pass a test to play a game??? What planet are you from?

[Kaleun_Endrass]

We had to plug in a 'protection device' in the joystick port 2...
Such dongles are usually used for industry software that is expensive, like AutoCAD, SolidEdge and almost every machine vision software I know of...
But for consumer software that costs less than 300 EUR (or GBP, or $, doesn't matter) it's too expensive to go that way. And if you think of it that way, that cracker groups just sit and wait there for such an opportunity to crack such a copy protection, it would be a very uneconomical one.

[Boris]

I voted no.

I actually like the idea of compulsory training in principle. It adds some sense of realism, and as a veteran silent hunter player I would enjoy these training missions.
But because I have played other silent hunter games before, I can imagine that some training missions may get tedious, either because I've done it all before, or because they may just be badly scripted. So I would want the option to at least skip these missions if I wanted to.
It's not like I don't want training. I do want to be able to play the game. So I will be more inclined to do the training missions than not. Even newbies, who won't be confident with the game straight off, will probably want to do the the training missions.

Yet I think it is a little elitist, and perhaps a little arrogant to call for compulsory training missions for every player, before they can enter the campaign. Please, I don't intend for this to be a personal insult against anyone, but you cannot realistically expect Ubi to market a game that alienates the non-hardcore crowd. It is not just to Ubi's advantage if SH5 does well, it will also determine the future of the franchise.

The idea is ok, but it is in no way realistic to implement.

[Egan]

Pass a test to play a game??? What planet are you from?

Aight, I'll try my best, I offered to come back to mature disscussion but some ppl just can not get a grip on themselves, thus provoking to continue this kindergarden :) :)

I think you will find the vast majority of subsim members
value Steve's knowledge, calm good humour and friendliness far more than they value the inane rantings of an unpleasant child. Steve has earned peoples respect plenty of times over by simply being a stand up guy. I don't just speak for myself but for a lot of people here. Simply put: if you have to ask you are never going to know. But you know what? Like I said, Steve doesn't need me to defend him. You want to find out more about the guy read back over his 40,000 odd posts. You might learn something.

As for your point above, you claim you offered mature discussion after other people lowered the tone. What? You aim a pitiful and childish insult at me and don't think your going to be pulled up for it? Instead you try to retreat behind an eggshell thin wall of 'well, let's all try to be reasonable now.' I can't beleive you are quite as dumb as that so I'll have to believe your one intention in all this is to troll. Good luck to you.

[FIREWALL]

I voted yes... but yes and no is how i really feel.

Yes because - if people would take their time to use the training missions to gain a fair level of proficiency and competency they would find themselves more successful on actual patrol.

No because - you can alienate a lot of casual gamers by doing it this way.

I think that if you set your realism settings above 90%, then you should have to go through the U-boat training missions and there would be a minimum pass rate on each mission. and a minimum total pass rate (so you could perform poorly on one or more sessions but still pass.)

for ultimate realism, you would be assigned to a port and a sub type based on your overall performance.

in other words

If minimum passing is 70% and you scored...

70-80% you would be assigned to a Type II until you proved yourself in combat and earned the ability to transfer to a new boat.

81%-90% you would be assigned to a VII

91%-100% you could choose your own command and base.

just something to think about... i think you could implement it into the career mode without ruffling feathers.

but like i said, forcing a player to complete training missions to a certain degree of proficiency is only going to alienate more casual players.


I could read 2 pages of posts but, I think along yhe same lines as GR.

To have it locked is a game killer and would hurt sales.

At least until the crack came out. :haha:

[IanC]

Such dongles are usually used for industry software that is expensive, like AutoCAD, SolidEdge and almost every machine vision software I know of...
But for consumer software that costs less than 300 EUR (or GBP, or $, doesn't matter) it's too expensive to go that way. And if you think of it that way, that cracker groups just sit and wait there for such an opportunity to crack such a copy protection, it would be a very uneconomical one.

Yes, you're right. Not to mention it didn't seem to be very effective. I remember somebody playing with a cracked copy, a regular old joystick plug was all that was needed in port 2.

[Sgtmonkeynads]

I hope it is not an essay exam, or story problems.
Multiple Choice ? Can we use our notes, or is it open book?
Do we have to list all ingredients in the soup of the day!

[henriksultan]

I voted no, this is a game and dont force people to do these... it sucks :O:
When I as a player wanna learn the game to the max I do all Training missions and read like an idiot on forums since they are pretty much always the best source of information :yeah:

[Lord Justice]

Dear sirs, by golly one did not expect so much heated and debated posts, at time of writting its 42 against 35 for this idea. Where is all the posts from the yes agree ? about 5 or 6, it appears its only the ones whom disagree that are expressing their douts and rantings. Yes i ranted too for which iam sorry, as i started the debate. Let me explain please, this is my reason. I Dont care if this is endorsed, and immplemented in the sim, but i do believe most wanted more realism, and i felt it an important fact before most other realism, as in shadows, searching boats etc, as this was indeed an earlier requirement in order to sail. I post a thread which i think bears lots of relativity, and wonder thoughts of others, weather it works or not matters not to me, as long as the thread bears good conversation, debate even heated if must be, the main thing is that it makes an intresting discussion, and some points to learn. I posted a thread in bottom of page 2 maybe 3 now called (Crew Medals and Promotions,) of wich turned out some very good ideas and points and one hopes they are immplemented in sh5, as for my other Deceased crew members, it quite simply happened. If sincere truth be known, this was just originaly going to be a poll, as i said i do not care if immplemented, but i sill stand my ground that it bears relativity, and i would still not like a newbie joining my flotilla the easy way. I could have posted this diffrently agreed, taking into consideration casual gamers and marketing or simply the cost of purchase, but quite simply thought most had slight more scope to understand what it was originally aimed at, thus being realism, and did not want to write a large story behind it. perhaps could have worded it more properly, or in a more forgiving manner to all levels, but one should and does understand, but iam happy that another thread has and is turning out for a good topic. I would rather post a thread for intresting discussion, rather than simply post in response of a friend. Would the thread work ? it matters not as long as the topic hase been debated over then maybe just maybe and most agree or immplicated another way with imput then some of us may be on to something. :)thank you

[Egan]

Dear sirs, by golly one did not expect so much heated and debated posts, at time of writting its 42 against 35 for this idea. Where is all the posts from the yes agree ? about 5 or 6, it appears its only the ones whom disagree that are expressing their douts and rantings. Yes i ranted too for which iam sorry, as i started the debate. Let me explain please, this is my reason. I Dont care if this is endorsed, and immplemented in the sim, but i do believe most wanted more realism, and i felt it an important fact before most other realism, as in shadows, searching boats etc, as this was indeed an earlier requirement in order to sail. I post a thread which i think bears lots of relativity, and wonder thoughts of others, weather it works or not matters not to me, as long as the thread bears good conversation, debate even heated if must be, the main thing is that it makes an intresting discussion, and some points to learn. I posted a thread in bottom of page 2 maybe 3 now called (Crew Medals and Promotions,) of wich turned out some very good ideas and points and one hopes they are immplemented in sh5, as for my other Deceased crew members, it quite simply happened. If sincere truth be known, this was just originaly going to be a poll, as i said i do not care if immplemented, but i sill stand my ground that it bears relativity, and i would still not like a newbie joining my flotilla the easy way. I could have posted this diffrently agreed, taking into consideration casual gamers and marketing or simply the cost of purchase, but quite simply thought most had slight more scope to understand what it was originally aimed at, thus being realism, and did not want to write a large story behind it. perhaps could have worded it more properly, or in a more forgiving manner to all levels, but one should and does understand, but iam happy that another thread has and is turning out for a good topic. I would rather post a thread for intresting discussion, rather than simply post in response of a friend. Would the thread work ? it matters not as long as the topic hase been debated over then maybe just maybe and most agree or immplicated another way with imput then some of us may be on to something. :)thank you

I've often felt there are two rather different types of realism when it comes to sims. One sort is what you could describe as the 'Iron Man model' where a player plays the game in a certain way in order to make the experience closer to what he feels is realistic. This includes things such as playing in real time, observing real world rules and constraints (diving every 4 hours in poor visibility, sticking to patrol areas rather than free hunting and so forth,) and generally role playing the game. The other sort is mechanical realism which is what, at base, a sim should have in spades. We can work out manual firing solutions for example, but we can't check the salinity levels in the ocean nor can we navigate by the moon and the stars. There are, of course, thousands of examples of this.

My feelings are that your suggestion is firmly in the Iron Man model. Thats cool but not everyone wants that level of realism. I'm also aware that todays casual gamer might well be tomorrows hardcore simmer and I'm not entirely convinced our hobby could survive if those future fans were scared off by elitist concepts - which, I'm afraid, is what it feels like rather than it having anything to do with realism. This is NOT endorsing the dumbing down of any sim but rather suggesting that the game embraces new players whilst remaining true to itself. Besides, given the storm of abuse companies get from using DRM, can you imagine what they would get if you had to pass a test to play the game?

I apologize for any offense I may have caused in previous posts and agree with the chimp about returning to a mature discussion.

Well, maybe not that mature..:D

[Sailor Steve]

I'm curious now: exactly where did I assault your position? The first attack between us was this comment by you:
This attitude when guys says: "oh I payed MY money I want it all however I want" is sooooo Pro-Capitalisticly American
I said how I felt about your idea; you replied with a superior, condescending and nationalistic insult.

I have only ever objected to your insistence that this be compulsory, as mentioned in the thread title. I don't need to be told by you or anyone else how I must play with the toys I purchase, and neither do you.

Egan agreed with me, and tried to defend me in a reasonable manner. You responded by making a gay joke, and a bad one at that. I've never insulted you, nor anyone else with that kind of attack.

I haven't tried to pick a fight with you or 4Para. I've disagreed with your idea that people have to pass a test before they can play a game. You have accused me of being afraid of exams. Please try to be just a little civil, and make a reasoned case as to why people should have to play your way whether they want to or not.

[mookiemookie]

http://www.wineberserkers.com/images/smilies/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

[Nickolas]

...
And yes I wouldn't expect better advice from such narrow minded life form like...

i laughed quite hard at the fact that you called someone narrow minded for saying "every one should play a game however they like" while you keep saying "every one should play it like I want".

You made me laugh clown :DAre you trying to make a troller from me now ?

you do that on your own actually.

My feelings are that your suggestion is firmly in the Iron Man model.
110% agree.


http://www.wineberserkers.com/images/smilies/1974_eating_popcorn.gif
me too http://www.wineberserkers.com/images/smilies/1974_eating_popcorn.gif


edit: SS i hold you in high steem to but, the Reductio ad absurdum earlier could have been avoided don't you think? ;)

[Lord Justice]

no sides or mixing the pot if you please gents, can we be nice now , please, thankyou.:up:

[Sailor Steve]

edit: SS i hold you in high steem to but, the Reductio ad absurdum earlier could have been avoided don't you think? ;)
Probably, but when someone says something I disgree with I feel compelled to respond.

Probably an area where I am indeed childish, but at least I can face it. And I do, pretty much every day.:dead:

[Webster]

no sides or mixing the pot if you please gents, can we be nice now , please, thankyou.:up:


thank you :up:

if anyone wishes to continue insulting people they will find i am no longer in the christmas spirit :stare:

you got something to say, do it in PM's

lets respect 4paras thread and lets discuss the topics he raised

[GoldenRivet]

This is a fact IMHO

Just thought this funny...

but how can something be a "fact in my opinion"??? :har:


thats like saying "this is for real! for pretend!"

or

"I made all A's on my report card... except for 2 Bs and C"

just thought it was funny is all. :)

no sides or mixing the pot if you please gents, can we be nice now , please, thankyou.:up:

Agreed.

its amazing how fast these snow balls roll down hill isnt it>?

[Boris]

but how can something be a "fact in my opinion"??? :har:



Looks like we've bumped into a very interesting philosophical question here...

Since the only way reality can be interpreted is through the senses of each human individual, each individual has his or her own subjective interpretation of reality. If something seems to be fact to you, as 100% solid as it may seem, it can never be true fact by the limitation our condition.
Many people once thought the earth was flat... a fact in their eyes. On the general topics thread you will also see that some take creationism to be fact, while others prefer evolution.

"There are no facts, only interpretations."
*Friedrich Nietzsche

[Sailor Steve]

I'm currently reading a primer on philosophy, and one of the chapters deals with the problem of words meaning different things to different discussions. You're right about different perceptions, but some facts are seemingly irrefutable. If we agree on the names we assign to numerical values, then it is a fact that two plus two will always equal four. This can be demonstrated by anyone over any number of repeated experiments, so it must be accepted as a fact.

Fact equaling opinion, in the case at hand, is an interesting point, and you're right - in philosophy everything seems to be subject to opinion. And I fell for your subtle trap, master.:rotfl2:

But to the point at hand. 4Para did raise a couple of interesting points.

Where is all the posts from the yes agree ?
The voting is still running fairly close to even, and no one is pitching in on why they voted 'Yes'. While I'm obviously solidly in the 'No' camp, I'd love to hear why other people would want this.

i would still not like a newbie joining my flotilla the easy way.
On the one hand, we don't have 'our' flotillas. It's still just a game, and the bottom line for me is...well, we've already heard that one.

But what about online campaigns, the best-known example being Wolves At War? I don't know how stringent their tests are (probably not too hard considering the number of players they have, and considering the number they might lose if they make it too difficult), but I think they have some. In this case it's like a club (or like real service) - they have the right to establish any rules and restrictions they want, and if you want to play with them you have to do it their way. And that's fair. The only reason I've never joined is that I've never had the ability to play consistently enough to make it worthwhile.

[karamazovnew]

I thought that this was settled in the first 2 pages that the best system is the one in SH3, optional training with a bonus for completion and a reminder when you start your first career. Why go beyond that? It's a SIM! I don't remember starting Flight Simulator and being told "To access the new amazing 747 you must first pass the training exam".

P.S: I can land a 747 backwards but I've never passed the bloody exam.

[GoldenRivet]

P.S: I can land a 747 backwards

He's not kidding folks.

You can land any airplane backwards in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

and given the right conditions (which are all but impossible)... you can do it in real life as well ;)

[karamazovnew]

He's not kidding folks.

You can land any airplane backwards in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

and given the right conditions (which are all but impossible)... you can do it in real life as well ;)

:up: Good one. I guess an easier way would be to open up GMax and turn the 3d model around :haha:

[don1reed]

I just bought a new car...paid cash, and nope, it didn't come with training missions. It has alot more bells and whistles than my first ride had (1940 Ford tudor convertible) back in 1958; but, a computer game, sure, make it optional.

[longam]

I voted no for the exact reason many have posted in here, I paid for it.

Level up doesn't appeal to me so console games are low on my radar.

[Lord Justice]

Sir Longam, You paid for it? When i was doing my basic training in the army, some of us recruits at the time, paid for some extras toward our kit. did that mean i could exempt my 21 week selection and training and go straight into my airbourne unit? in hindsight of course, perhaps when i purchase my game if through a local store i will ask the little guy behind the counter if i can have a free sony playstation! One does state the obvious, sir may i remind you we all paying for it, use the force, its all about the force, my friend. thankyou .:cool:

[mookiemookie]

Sir Longam, You paid for it? When i was doing my basic training in the army, some of us recruits at the time, paid for some extras toward our kit. did that mean i could exempt my 21 week selection and training and go straight into my airbourne unit? in hindsight of course, perhaps when i purchase my game if through a local store i will ask the little guy behind the counter if i can have a free sony playstation! One does state the obvious, sir may i remind you we all paying for it, use the force, its all about the force, my friend. thankyou .:cool:

SH5 is a game, that I paid for. It is not volunteering for the Kriegsmarine, circa 1939. If I paid for it, I should be able to play it however I want, regardless of what someone's idea of realism is.

Would you force someone to play in 1x time compression also because you couldn't do anything but that when you volunteered for the army?

[Lord Justice]

SH5 is a game, that I paid for. It is not volunteering for the Kriegsmarine, circa 1939. If I paid for it, I should be able to play it however I want, regardless of what someone's idea of realism is.

Would you force someone to play in 1x time compression also because you couldn't do anything but that when you volunteered for the army?Sir Mookie, cute, i think you crossed the line here my friend, why such absurd comment? and i never said how you can play it? Iam somewhat confused to your strong views? have i said something or am i missing something here? please sir indulge me,( Read Post 84 please ) in second thoughts please dont indulge me, post 84 says it all, perhaps one missed that, watch your accusations! thankyou.

[Reece]

Mookie is correct though!:yep:

[Lord Justice]

Mookie is correct though!:yep:lol, is he? indeed. I think you are mistaken sir, read your companions statement, thankyou.

[Sailor Steve]

Sir Mookie, cute, i think you crossed the line here my friend, why such absurd comment?
I'm curious again. Exactly what line has he crossed? Be specific, please.

and i never said how you can play it?
The title of the thread is Should U-Boat Training/Exams Be made Compulsory, and you've consistently endorsed that point of view, which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. That said, insisting on compulsory exams before one can start to play a game is indeed telling them how to play it (or in this case, how not to). In your most recent post you compared purchasing the game to buying some of your own equipment, and that is what Mookie responded to. Buying equipment for a real life job or commission is not comparable to buying what is essentially a hobby for your own enjoyment.

When we say we want more realism in a game, what we are truly asking for is something that feels more real. I've said repeatedly over the years that I'm glad that manual targetting is becoming more real, but I'm glad it's an option because I'm terrible at it. Options are good.:sunny:

[Reece]

4Para, my statement " Mookie is correct though!:yep:" was in relation to the following (probably should have said - IMO!!)::yep:
mookiemookie said:
SH5 is a game, that I paid for. It is not volunteering for the Kriegsmarine, circa 1939. If I paid for it, I should be able to play it however I want, regardless of what someone's idea of realism is.

[mookiemookie]

Sir Mookie, cute, i think you crossed the line here my friend, why such absurd comment?

My comment was completely reasonable and if you feel it crossed a line, then perhaps you're thin skinned.

perhaps one missed that, watch your accusations! thankyou. I accused you of nothing.

[Lord Justice]

My comment was completely reasonable and if you feel it crossed a line, then perhaps you're thin skinned.

I accused you of nothing. You sir accused me of recruiting for circa 1939!!! Now iam thin skinned, please leave personal thoughts aside sir, I think you are taking this way to far, conjuring up ideas mostly negativities based on theory, if one insists feel free knock yourself out, at my expense.:)

[JU_88]

Voted no.
IMHO Its good example of how if a game or sim becomes TOO realistic, it will become something of a chore and end up being boring as a result....
Imagine a racing game, where you first have to pass your driving test before you can race - who can be bothered with that sh!t?
Plus it would have the casual gamer reaching for the unistall button faster than you can say 'Los' :down:

[Lord Justice]

I'm curious again. Exactly what line has he crossed? Be specific, please.


The title of the thread is Should U-Boat Training/Exams Be made Compulsory, and you've consistently endorsed that point of view, which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. That said, insisting on compulsory exams before one can start to play a game is indeed telling them how to play it (or in this case, how not to). In your most recent post you compared purchasing the game to buying some of your own equipment, and that is what Mookie responded to. Buying equipment for a real life job or commission is not comparable to buying what is essentially a hobby for your own enjoyment.
Sir Sailor Steve, Let me simplify it for you okay. You dont think this chap crossed the line? He Accused me of circa 1939 cmon it was direct to me, then proceeds to state iam thin skinned 2 personal comments aimed at me however bias one may be. If you and the learner member had reviewed the post he was refering did one not see the comment (IN HIND SIGHT), but as there has be no mention of hind sight from him then it is a direct accusation. Agree? Therefor one can compare in hind sight the comparison to kit regardless? but like i said on post 84, iam not fussed whats in the game as long as intresting topic is made from the thread is what counts, agree? As for this thread i thought i explained all about the reason on post 84, yet some still insist on conjuring up strange presumptions, or accusing some one of something. If pepole wish to say something direct or insulting please pm me dont try to look something in front of others, as for you steve what is your main crib here? i stated should? for a pole? iam not on the dev team, i think one has enough knowledge to know what i was getting at, without the petty continueous demands that iam telling you how to play a game come come man i know you are not that petty, but i do know you are using it as an ace card to ride the support boat of riddicule, as one is to insistent in quotes, scrutiny, etc you dont endorse the idea of thread ok but dont insult my intellect with regard to who is saying what and why they are doing it. Would you like for me to do it to you? negative or positive, now if one persists in some form of mockery do not include me. I already had some infringments on this tread i have no wish to continue, but from now i will be scrutinizing all your posts and conjure up some strange meanings and adaptations even although i know the principle of ones opinion, So now my conclusion is that we want a more realistic game but wthout some realism and fact as we are all forking out money during these hard times, and we all feel love for the lesser simmer with least exp, ok i accept that gooday :)simmer

[Takeda Shingen]

Too much heat. We've fallen to the level where we are fighting about what we are fighting about. Closed.

The management

[Webster]

SH5 is a game, that I paid for. It is not volunteering for the Kriegsmarine, circa 1939. If I paid for it, I should be able to play it however I want, regardless of what someone's idea of realism is.

Would you force someone to play in 1x time compression also because you couldn't do anything but that when you volunteered for the army?

Sir Mookie, cute, i think you crossed the line here my friend, why such absurd comment? and i never said how you can play it? Iam somewhat confused to your strong views? have i said something or am i missing something here? please sir indulge me,( Read Post 84 please ) in second thoughts please dont indulge me, post 84 says it all, perhaps one missed that, watch your accusations! thankyou.

@ 4para, yes you are missing something here.

he said nothing insulting and stated why he had a different opinion on earning the right to play the game but for some reason you completely missunderstood what he said.


here is what he said:


SH5 is a game, that I paid for.

this is simple enough to understand, he paid for the game and does not want to be forced to earn the right to play it.


It is not volunteering for the Kriegsmarine, circa 1939. If I paid for it, I should be able to play it however I want, regardless of what someone's idea of realism is.

this is where you found offense but you shouldnt because he was only responding to your example of earning your way in the army by using a simular example of that time period that if you had joined the kriegsmarine in 1939 then yes you would earn your way but as a video game he doesnt want that even though doing it that way would be realistic.

once again a simple missunderstood statement has caused some friction where there should be none and its a shame this thread had to be closed because of it.