A simple feature that I really wish I had.

[riromero]

As a longtime SH3 player, I recently started SH4. I'm familiar with manual targeting from my SH3 days. Most of the targeting procedures work okay from a dead stop but I find that I almost always need to target while maneuvering. Here's one simple addition to these games that would make my life much easier. When I send the "mark" of bearing and distance to the TDC, wouldn't it also be nice to have the mark with a time-stamp transferred to the map simultaneously? It doesn't have to be the actual position of the target, just my imperfect, wave-tossed estimate. Now, if I'm maneuvering, I have to pause the game, go to the map and use a limited set of tools to plot the bearing, distance and time.

[BigWalleye]

That is a great idea, and once again one of those little chores that real-life skippers had a crew to do for them, in this case called the plotting party. I doubt that this feature will show up in a mod any time soon, since it probably involves getting into UberSoft's sacred source code. I understand that they threaten anyone who touches it with copyright violation.

[magic452]

Welcome to the boat mate. :salute:

And welcome to another boat also as there have been several who have expressed the same sort of thing.

Magic

[TorpX]

Yes, the shortcomings of the SH4 charts system, was the biggest disappointment I felt, when I first got the game. I had assumed this was something that would have been carefully thought out. Boy, was I wrong. :O:


It is still better than what we had in SHCE, though. I would have to make plots on graph paper, do lots of squinting, drawing, measuring, and erasing. The best part was when I didn't rush my approach, and ran off the paper, requiring me to copy some of the points onto a new sheet of paper, to keep going. However, I'll admit, a successful torpedo attack, did provide a sense of accomplishment. :yeah:

[fireftr18]

That's the main reason I don't use manual targeting (laziness is the other). I feel like the auto targeting is more realistic because the captain didn't do it by himself. I do wish that the developers did put in the ability to use manual while in auto targeting mode. When I do fire, I don't lock on, I like to use a spread.:Kaleun_Periskop:

[BigWalleye]

Manual targeting gives you NO help, even with things a real skipper delegated to his crew. Auto-targeting does way too much, and always does it perfectly (or so it appears). Ideally, the AI would assist you, and the quality of the assistance would depend on the experience of the crew, their fatigue level, etc, etc, etc. All this is perfectly within the capability of our PCs, but we'll probably never see it in our lifetime. :/\\!!

[TorpX]

When I do fire, I don't lock on, I like to use a spread.:Kaleun_Periskop:
Can't you use the offset dial in auto mode?




I certainly would like a future SH to have a well designed crew plot as an option, but I'm not entirely sure I would use it. I've gotten used to doing it, and I think the game would become boring if the crew did everything they did in RL.

You can certainly play the game that way, but if it was designed around that concept, many stations in the game would be superfluous. You wouldn't need a sonar station (or sounds for it), radar station, deck gun, AA guns, or (GULP!) a TDC. The control room could despense with most of the instrumentation. Mainly, you would be hovering around the periscope in the conning tower, or on the bridge, or perhaps, in your cabin. Most everything else would be mere eye-candy.


I think most people want to turn the dials, see the blips on the screen, and operate the machinery themselves. In this way, you learn how the machinery operates, instead of just barking orders at a simulated crew.

[BigWalleye]

Can't you use the offset dial in auto mode?




I certainly would like a future SH to have a well designed crew plot as an option, but I'm not entirely sure I would use it. I've gotten used to doing it, and I think the game would become boring if the crew did everything they did in RL.

You can certainly play the game that way, but if it was designed around that concept, many stations in the game would be superfluous. You wouldn't need a sonar station (or sounds for it), radar station, deck gun, AA guns, or (GULP!) a TDC. The control room could despense with most of the instrumentation. Mainly, you would be hovering around the periscope in the conning tower, or on the bridge, or perhaps, in your cabin. Most everything else would be mere eye-candy.


I think most people want to turn the dials, see the blips on the screen, and operate the machinery themselves. In this way, you learn how the machinery operates, instead of just barking orders at a simulated crew.


I'm not sure why you say that the sensor stations would be superfluous. Those stations actually seem to do an appropriate (if not perfect) job. When I read a few of the first-person accounts, it seems the skipper would often check the radar displays himself, to improve his situational awareness, and of course the passive sonar would be fed into the intercom. Fiddling dials for data input is something that can't be avoided, unless you go to voice command, which I heartily recommend (try sh4speech). But the captain's job was to fight the boat, and the crew was provided only because he couldn't do it all himself. This is particuarly true during approach and attack. If the sim were properely designed, the captain's job should be more than enough workload to keep me busy, anyway. To me, adding historically inappropriate tasks just to keep the workload high reflects weak design. I realize that you are not alone - a lot of people like that approach. It's just not what I want from a simulation. YMMV.

[Gerald]

:sunny:

[TorpX]

I'm not sure why you say that the sensor stations would be superfluous. ...
I don't mean to criticize your philosophy here. If you enjoy playing in this style, by all means do it. What I meant to say is that, if everyone just wanted to be the captain, and nothing else, there would be little need for most of the other stations. I don't think the captain was able to look over the shoulder of the radar or sonar operator as much in RL as happens in the movies. I'm not saying it didn't happen; I just don't think it occurred very often. I'll concede your point about the intercom, though.


If the sim were properly designed, the captain's job should be more than enough workload to keep me busy, anyway. To me, adding historically inappropriate tasks just to keep the workload high reflects weak design.

Well, this is a matter of opinion. I certainly disagree with the "historically inappropriate" part. Who says we must only play the part of the captain? Sure we can if we want to, but this would end up leading us to conducting almost the whole patrol, going between the charts and the periscope/ TBT.

As to the workload part, the game captain's workload is a good deal less than what a RL skipper would have. RL captains had to please their superiors, arrange for repairs, deal with replacing personnel, work out watch bills, handle any personality conflicts, and drill-drill drill... A captain had to do a lot of work just to make the boat ready for sea. Our game crews are more like cardboard cut-outs than living, breathing men, so this aspect of command is almost totally negated.

Of course, I realize many want to play your way. Fortunately, we have a choice (within limits, anyway).

[BigWalleye]

First of all, I have no argument with your main contention. We are each talking about what we expect from a game, and that's strictly a matter of personal taste. Can't argue that!


I do have to take exception to a couple of your statements, though, where I find our sources conflict. First is:


I I don't think the captain was able to look over the shoulder of the radar or sonar operator as much in RL as happens in the movies. I'm not saying it didn't happen; I just don't think it occurred very often.


My source here is Dick O'Kane. In "Clear the Bridge!" he frequently refers to visually checking the radar scopes to improve his SA, sometimes leaving the bridge during a surface approach to do so. (Obviously not during the final approach!) He seemed to find it a valuable tool which he personally employed, not relying entirely on verbal reports.

My second exception is one which I haven't seen mentioned before (although I haven't read through the years of back postings). In SH4, I believe the captain is far too involved with personnel decisions. On a USN vessel, personnel decisions are the responsibility of the XO. In fact, most of the tasks you mention


arrange for repairs, deal with replacing personnel, work out watch bills, handle any personality conflicts, and drill-drill drill...


were the responsibility of the exec and senior officers. The CO just outlined to the exec what his overall intentions were, and the officer cadre did the detail work. Watch bills, for example, were the special province of the Chief of the Boat, checked by the XO and approved by the CO. (Sources here are Dick O'Kane again, Ned Beach, and Kenneth Ruiz, all first-person accounts.) The captain did have to interface with his superiors (something we don't ever do in SH4: "Where's the feedback, sir?") and use the weight of his authority ("renown" was real, if not as carefully quantified) to get things done.

Just my personal style of play, but I'd like to be able to function in the game in the ways the real-life skippers functioned in their personal accounts. If a real skipper manned the deck-gun, then fine, I'll do that. On my boat, I don't use the guns at all, because my crew couldn't hit a barn if they were inside it, and if I went down and pointed the thing, Uncle Charlie would have a fit! I'd love to be able to motivate my crew - that was someting the CO really did (and that can be simulated in a game.)

So in the end, none of us gets everything they want from the game. Fortunately, with all the mods, we can tailor it somewhat. But I'll still bemoan its "shortcomings" and continue to seek the Grail. (It's just over there....:))