Now,this was not realistic!

[VonApist]

On my way to Grid AM34 and out of Bergen I spot a British Convoy. 4 destroyers escorting 10 merchants. I place U28 in a perfect spot for attack and after 3.5 hours 8 merchants sunk and the 4 destroyers also hit the bottom of the sea (one at a time, after U28 being severly depth charged).
I never reached AM34 as I ended up out of torpedoes and deck gun ammo. Mind you I play GWX3 via SH3 with realism 85% (only have cameras checked for screenshots and WO doing the solutions).

I got a knights cross, got back (hull integrity 85%, 12 ships sunk, 48,000 tons) but i felt that it was not realistic. It wasnt easy , granted, but could never happen in real life.

Agree?

[King_Zog]

Sure, at the end of the day SH3 is just a computer game. No matter how high your realism settings are, you can pull of loads of stuff ingame that would just get you killed or would be near impossible to replicate in real life.

[Jimbuna]

Tis simply a game, whatever you make of it....otherwise if and when you make a mistake and get sunk you wouldn't get a second chance to play again or post here :DL

[sublynx]

Your hull integrity was 85 %. If you want more challenge, you could make a rule: "if the boat gets damaged, I suddenly start to think about my kids and wife back home, and about the crew I'm responsible for, and their children missing their daddies, just in case that pressure hull is not ok - and escape back to port ASAP".

An even harder rule would be: "dying in the game means three months of no playing SH3".

You could also tweak the sensors of the ASW and/or make the depth charge impact areas bigger.

[EFileTahi-A]

The only reason you managed to be so successful in sinking all those ships was because you had the luxury of risking everything in that hunt, having only to Click-Restart-Button as a consequence in case you had lost.

In a real situation I REALLY doubt anyone would be brave enough to continuously risk their lives and crew to engage the enemy after being depth charged one or more times. The risks were too great, unless you were a mad captain.

Imagine youself in that situation you described, imagine that if you loose you will not be able to play silent hunter not ever again and see yourself heading back to the nearest port in most situations. :)

[mookiemookie]

Tis simply a game, whatever you make of it....otherwise if and when you make a mistake and get sunk you wouldn't get a second chance to play again or post here :DL

This is the crux of the matter. You took chances in your game that a real skipper would never have done, knowing in real life that being reckless would mean the end of your life and the lives of your crew.

So no, it wasn't realistic, but only because of your actions. But it's only a game. Play it however you will. :sunny:

[VonApist]

Once in a while, its worth taking the risk... Regarding the restart I agree. But i play dead is dead. I just took the risk cause it was ok to do so. I have been depth charged hundreds of times in the game, it was the first to take the destroyers deliberately (not the odd engagement to self preserve when there was no room to run deep and silent). Chances are that these guys were complete amateurs (still Dec 1939).

At the end of the day yes its a game , but i dont think that taking a risk is not realistic. The non realistic part was the outcome...not the risk taking.


Otherwise I would play a fishing boat simulator ;)

[EFileTahi-A]

... I just took the risk cause it was ok to do so. ;)

Don't want to hammer but... This is exactly why you did it, it was ok to do it so, what could possibly go wrong? Starting a new campaign? I mean, not the fact you engaged the enemy, I believe any skipper would cease that opportunity but counter attacking a task force with a damage sub after being depth charged? Totally unrealistic.

... I have been depth charged hundreds of times in the game... Otherwise I would play a fishing boat simulator ;)

No skipper got depth charged hundreds of times, they usually got dead in the first or second one. I believe being depth charged is not something you get used to. Its like someone poiting a gun to your head in a robbery and you act like:, "nah, its okay honey I've dealt with this hundreds of times." Everytime someone points a gun to your head there is a chance you will get an extra hole in it and therefore you WILL react accordently. Unless you are a trained soldier with nerbs of steel, you will feel your heart trying to pop out your chest. The morale factor leading to fear, terror and panic, all Silent Hunter players are free from these feelings and act always with a cool mind. A luxury skippers in WWII did not had, among other things.

To finalize, skippers didn't had the chance to practise in such detail as presently available in SH. How many patrols have you ran? How much tonnage? Compare that to WWII records and spot the difference. Check also how many skippers did actually went through out the whole WWII still with life in their veins.

PS: I agree with you, that encounter you had was indeed unrealistic. ;)

[flag4]

...thats why the Aces scored high and many of them died: they were bold and reckless, calculating and very brave.

...i, on the other hand ALWAYS put my crew first now. the bold reckless brave days are over. they were always too short and in the end impatients got the better of me - and my crew.

the game is slower now, not that much heavy action and i weigh things up. i notice now that my patrols are longer too. tonnage is almost - almost! not so important. i want my crew and boat to come home and, somehow, make it to the end of the war...i have yet to be succesful in this. but when i do, i think then, the war for me will be over.

[EFileTahi-A]

...thats why the Aces scored high and many of them died: they were bold and reckless, calculating and very brave.

That means VonApist is indeed an reckless Ace and that his event was indeed realistic.

:O:

[difool2]

The only reason you managed to be so successful in sinking all those ships was because you had the luxury of risking everything in that hunt, having only to Click-Restart-Button as a consequence in case you had lost.

In a real situation I REALLY doubt anyone would be brave enough to continuously risk their lives and crew to engage the enemy after being depth charged one or more times. The risks were too great, unless you were a mad captain.

Samuel D. Dealey was famous for taking on Japanese escorts in such circumstances-until he took on one too many and paid the ultimate price.

[EFileTahi-A]

Samuel D. Dealey was famous for taking on Japanese escorts in such circumstances-until he took on one too many and paid the ultimate price.

About Samuel D. Dealey:
"For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as Commanding Officer of the U.S.S. Harder during her 5th War Patrol in Japanese-controlled waters. Floodlit by a bright moon and disclosed to an enemy destroyer escort which bore down with intent to attack, Comdr. Dealey quickly dived to periscope depth and waited for the pursuer to close range, then opened fire, sending the target and all aboard down in flames with his third torpedo. Plunging deep to avoid fierce depth charges, he again surfaced and, within 9 minutes after sighting another destroyer, had sent the enemy down tail first with a hit directly amidship. Evading detection, he penetrated the confined waters off Tawi Tawi with the Japanese Fleet base 6 miles away and scored death blows on 2 patrolling destroyers in quick succession. With his ship heeled over by concussion from the first exploding target and the second vessel nose-diving in a blinding detonation, he cleared the area at high speed. Sighted by a large hostile fleet force on the following day, he swung his bow toward the lead destroyer for another "down-the-throat" shot, fired 3 bow tubes and promptly crash-dived to be terrifically rocked seconds later by the exploding ship as the Harder passed beneath. This remarkable record of 5 vital Japanese destroyers sunk in 5 short-range torpedo attacks attests the valiant fighting spirit of Comdr. Dealey and his indomitable command.." - Wikipedia

Samuel did not re-engaged the enemy after being depth charged because it seems his sub never got to be depth charged. The thread's author said he sunk each destroyer one at the time after being depth charged, they were 4 destroyers , so I presume there were 3 counter attacks. Between these counter attacks the submarine was hit by depth charges. This scenario is definately not the same Samuel faced or played. He was reckless but not in such magnitude.

I hope everyone understands that I'm not condemning the player's aproach toward such event because I would do the same, I'm just explaining why such victory took place and why it seemed.. odd.

[Sailor Steve]

While I agree with the above opinions, especially that the difference between real life and the game is that we can't actually die, your patrol is not entirely unrealistic. There were 21 real-life patrols more successful than yours, so it did indeed happen.
http://uboat.net/ops/top_patrols.htm

On the other hand we don't really play Dead Is Dead, no matter how much we claim to the contrary. You want to really play DiD (without actually dying, of course)? Try this: If you die in your campaign, put the game away and don't play it again for a year. You'll be much more careful after that. :sunny:

[EFileTahi-A]

While I agree with the above opinions, especially that the difference between real life and the game is that we can't actually die, your patrol is not entirely unrealistic. There were 21 real-life patrols more successful than yours, so it did indeed happen.
http://uboat.net/ops/top_patrols.htm

On the other hand we don't really play Dead Is Dead, no matter how much we claim to the contrary. You want to really play DiD (without actually dying, of course)? Try this: If you die in your campaign, put the game away and don't play it again for a year. You'll be much more careful after that. :sunny:

The main topic is regarding that specific event's score, not an entire patrol's score. I honestly don't know if a single skipper actually managed to sink 14 ships (10 mice and 4 cats) over a single task force. From what I know about subs and their engaging strategies / playmode I believe this is most unlikely to ever happened by the reasons I stated above.

[timmy41]

No skipper got depth charged hundreds of times, they usually got dead in the first or second one.
False, Depth charges were notoriously survivable, and there are many recorded events of submarines surviving hours of attacks.

[VonApist]

"Don't want to hammer but... This is exactly why you did it, it was ok to do it so, what could possibly go wrong? "

What i meant is that i took the risk in the context of the game. What other risk is there? We are all armchair skippers, unless somebody believes that he really has a grasp of what it was to be ACTUALLY patrolling in a sub. All the discussion is in the context of the game...

The destroyers where sloppy attacking and then taking a LONG time to circle and pass over. This gave me windows of opportunity to attack. I was not damaged during the depth charges. I took damage at my last attack to the destroyer and from some fire from a merchant. Just to set the record straight...

At the end of the day, if you want me to put it this way..if in reality a german uboat commander would come back and say : "Hey Karl D, i spotted a convoy but i got chased away. 0 torpedoes fired, 0 ships sunk. I will be in the nightclub, let me know in 3 weeks which is my next patrol grid" he would face the firing squad. A couple of skippers did actually...they were supposed to get there and fight. And fighting didn't mean to down the odd defenseless merchant - not after 1941 anyways.

[EFileTahi-A]

False, Depth charges were notoriously survivable, and there are many recorded events of submarines surviving hours of attacks.

I was refering to the number of times one would be depth charged and not their pop count per can. I apologize if I mislead you or anyone else.

[EFileTahi-A]

"Don't want to hammer but... This is exactly why you did it, it was ok to do it so, what could possibly go wrong? "

What i meant is that i took the risk in the context of the game. What other risk is there? We are all armchair skippers, unless somebody believes that he really has a grasp of what it was to be ACTUALLY patrolling in a sub. All the discussion is in the context of the game...

So, its all within the game's context... so why did you brought the "unrealistic" into it? I mean, where you comparing the game's event to real events at any time at all? Or comparing this event (your encounter) with unrealistic events within the game's reality context?

Now I'm confused. Anyway I've said enough here and I don't have more to say. Don't bother posting back I ain't coming to this thread again.

Peace!

[Osmium Steele]

The main topic is regarding that specific event's score, not an entire patrol's score. I honestly don't know if a single skipper actually managed to sink 14 ships (10 mice and 4 cats) over a single task force. From what I know about subs and their engaging strategies / playmode I believe this is most unlikely to ever happened by the reasons I stated above.

The main reason that particular attack is unrealistic is that the convoy would have scattered when the escorts started sinking. No way any single uboat would have "SUNK EM ALL" tm.

[VonApist]

EfileTahi i dont understand why you get upset, anyways.

I was commenting on the realism of the game. AI should scatter the convoy and make the destroyers run more efficient. You started your replies on the game vs reality context. I dont think that anyone here believes that the game is anything close to reality. It is just a GAME. A very good one, very successful in trancending players into the era, getting some feel. but thats it. its a game. Me realism comment refered to the AI of the convoy and destroyers. The GWX developers have done a superb job an all aspects of the game. I just commented that in some cases AI could be more "realistic". You want to change "realistic" with "difficult"? be my guest.

Peace to you too
:arrgh!:

[Pisces]

Don't worry. A few more of those 'easy' succes stories, and you'll see. Complacency sets in and you'll drown in it! :dead:

[sublynx]

Don't worry. A few more of those 'easy' succes stories, and you'll see. Complacency sets in and you'll drown in it! :dead:

:DL that's how I got killed the last time (tried avoiding a destroyer at periscope depth - "they have never noticed me before" - well, this time they did...) :lost:

[Snestorm]

:DL that's how I got killed the last time (tried avoiding a destroyer at periscope depth - "they have never noticed me before" - well, this time they did...) :lost:

I do the same as you.

"But, Ive always done it this way", until that fateful day we learn that it no longer works, and the black screen appears.

[sublynx]

"But, Ive always done it this way", until that fateful day we learn that it no longer works, and the black screen appears.


That's something the game does really well, IMO. One has these long patrols where the same kind of good old solutions work, but on the background there are advances in weaponry and changes in the strategical and tactical situation that dictate that one has to be able to quicky realize when the battle has changed, and then quickly adapt one's solutions. If one is not aware of the change or the solution is wrong, the black screen drops on the boat, seemingly quite out of the blue. Very cool:arrgh!:

[Fish In The Water]

One has these long patrols where the same kind of good old solutions work, but on the background there are advances in weaponry and changes in the strategical and tactical situation that dictate that one has to be able to quicky realize when the battle has changed, and then quickly adapt one's solutions. If one is not aware of the change or the solution is wrong, the black screen drops on the boat...

Just imagine what that must have been like in real life. You're riding high through the 'Happy Times' refining your tactics, brimming with success, (perhaps getting a little full of yourself :O:), and then - just when you think you've got all the answers, they go and change the questions.

No margin for error, no time to figure it out, just wham, bam - adapt or die! :o

[sublynx]

Just imagine what that must have been like in real life.

Smoke from an engine room fire gathering at the floor of the boat, destroyer overhead, damaged depth gauge showing 60 meters and you realizing the boat is much deeper than you thought it was. You physically worn down from no exercise, not much sleep for the duration of the attack, your skin rashing from the everpresent moldness in a sub. Warmth inside areas of the boat at 60 degrees Celsius.

According to U-boat War Patrol: The Hidden Photographic Diary of U-564 by Lawrence Paterson these were some of the challenges Teddy Suhren and U-564 had to manage in one of their patrols.

I'm glad it's only a game :ping: because it sure is nicer thinking about things like "Now is that destroyer aware of our presence or not? How's my situational awareness right now? " in my comfy chair and not in a real submarine.

[Fish In The Water]

Smoke from an engine room fire gathering at the floor of the boat, destroyer overhead, damaged depth gauge showing 60 meters and you realizing the boat is much deeper than you thought it was. You physically worn down from no exercise, not much sleep for the duration of the attack, your skin rashing from the everpresent moldness in a sub. Warmth inside areas of the boat at 60 degrees Celsius.

And in the midst of all this you have to stay focused on your job, do it as best you can and trust your shipmates to do theirs. Anything less could mean the difference between life and death. Kind of puts 'pressure' into a whole new category.

All in all, I think I'll stick with my armchair sub. Seems a lot safer, at least until my chair catches on fire! :O: