Tom Clancy's SSN

[Driftwood]

Just picked this one up and am enjoying it. Read somewhere on these boards that tactics/strategies were pretty good and right on as compared to RL which is what prompted me to buy it. I'd be interested in any comments/reviews from our real bubbleheads out there. Always looking for strategy/tactical stuff that can be effectively incorporated into DW gameplay. :up:

[SKeeM]

I personaly thought it was the worst book I ever have read. I am 80% through it and I find it hard to bring myself to finish it. And that started at the 40% book mark. I dont belive that book was done by TC himself.

[Driftwood]

I personaly thought it was the worst book I ever have read. I am 80% through it and I find it hard to bring myself to finish it. And that started at the 40% book mark. I dont belive that book was done by TC himself.

You may right SKeeM. However, I wasn't looking for a literary critique, just an accuracy critique. :up:

[SKeeM]

I personaly thought it was the worst book I ever have read. I am 80% through it and I find it hard to bring myself to finish it. And that started at the 40% book mark. I dont belive that book was done by TC himself.

You may right SKeeM. However, I wasn't looking for a literary critique, just an accuracy critique. :up:

You think picking up subs from 60K yards away and getting class, range and blade count without any effort is accurate? Or hearing a helo launch from a ship 20K yards away wile being at 400 FT is? Sorry man but that book must have been written by a Army supply Sargent. Realing in the TA before an attack for fear of losing it wile running away? Or Picking up a Kilo at 2500K yards running at 5 knots?

[Driftwood]

I personaly thought it was the worst book I ever have read. I am 80% through it and I find it hard to bring myself to finish it. And that started at the 40% book mark. I dont belive that book was done by TC himself.

You may right SKeeM. However, I wasn't looking for a literary critique, just an accuracy critique. :up:

You think picking up subs from 60K yards away and getting class, range and blade count without any effort is accurate? Or hearing a helo launch from a ship 20K yards away wile being at 400 FT is? Sorry man but that book must have been written by a Army supply Sargent. Realing in the TA before an attack for fear of losing it wile running away? Or Picking up a Kilo at 2500K yards running at 5 knots?

EASY there big fella! Let's cover a few points. 1) I haven't finished the book yet so I am not operating with "complete" knowledge. 2) I am not a real bubblehead so I can't even begin to say whether or not any of the points you make have merit. 3) I certainly didn't post this to get into a debate with anyone and your "tone" seems slightly condescending. I'll assume that's unintended.

I have heard from real Submariners (and some research) that in a convergence zone (I think that's the right one) sonar contacts are possible over GREAT distances. Regarding the TA and reeling it in prior to an attack. I've also heard/read that this too is RL. My understanding is that those things are VERY expensive and sub skippers don't like to jeopardize them unneccesarily. Seems to me to be the logical thing to do prior to battle once you've established Master contacts. If one is anticipating having to do "angles and dangles" at high speed the last thing a sub skipper would want to worry about (above losing the TA) is having it foul the screw during high speed evasion. Then you'd REALLY be screwed. :rotfl: On picking up a Kilo at 25Kyds (if that's what you meant) at 5 knots and the helo thing you mention, I have to agree with you, that seems a little far fetched but I haven't gotten to that part of the book yet. The only thing about a helo I've read so far had to do with them picking one up that was hovering in Cheyenne's vicinity and wanting to take out the frigate before the helo could rearm and launch again. As I said earlier, I'm no real submariner which is why I came here to ask the question(s). If you are a real submariner I certainly defer to your wisdom and appreciate the feedback you've given me. :up: Any one else who can lend a hand in this discussion please, jump right in! :D

[SKeeM]

Hey man let me be clear on the fact i didnt mean to sound offencive. By no means would i want to offend you. Thats just the way i come off some times. But no i didnt mean to offend you :oops: Sorry if i did. But yea that book sucks :down: Red Storm Rising was so much better. I was so disipointed in SSN, My expectations were so high for it with Clancy's name on it. But thats not your fault. I shouldnt take out on you my frustration for him. Kisses and hugs man. LOL!

[Driftwood]

All is well! :up: And I completely agree about the comparison between this and Red Storm Rising. :cool:

[TLAM Strike]

I dont belive that book was done by TC himself. I think his fat-ness wrote his name (on the check...) and thats about it. :roll:

[bradclark1]

Nevermind.

[jason10mm]

Just remember that the book is basically a novelization of the computer game, which probably explains the odd episodic nature, wierd weapon restrictions (come on, they are the ONLY sub operating in the area yet the tender restricts their torpedos??), and ridiculous body count. I'm not a huge sub guy, but even I could tell the tech was vastly overblown. I don't recommend this book at all unless you just want to complete the Tom Clancy portion of your library :)

[Linton]

Didn't Clancy have help from a royal navy officer?I have read the book and it is not good.I have never played the game but the book is just a script of what to do.

[kschang]

Well, let's put it this way. By the end of the book, Cheyenne has sunk the Chinese navy thrice over!

I have both the game and the book, and the game is a VASTLY simplified sub sim. It's not really meant to be very realistic at all.

You can see my review of it over on Mobygames.com

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Just picked this one up and am enjoying it. Read somewhere on these boards that tactics/strategies were pretty good and right on as compared to RL which is what prompted me to buy it. I'd be interested in any comments/reviews from our real bubbleheads out there. Always looking for strategy/tactical stuff that can be effectively incorporated into DW gameplay. :up:

Worst book ever. While TC books were always somewhat pro-American, this one is a barf-promoter. There is a reason why that book was the first in the trash when I needed to lighten weight for my move.

Forget technical accuracy - it is his book and he can make his assumptions however he wants. Just the tactics were pukey...

Let's start with Chapter 1, Han vs 688. By the way, I find it really amusing that the Han did at least as well as those Akulas in the later half of the story. Let's see: you detect American sub. Knowing American subs especially in Clancyworld they have you as well, but he isn't shooting just yet. So what does he do? He fires a SET-53 outside his range. Hello? A 23-knot passive torpedo with a poor acquisition range against the 38-knot Cheyenne. You kinda getting my drift?

There are also similar "humor" with kamikaze subs and subs making it easier on the Americans (as if the magic hydroacoustic arrays he gave them wasn't bad enough) by using active pinging... or that Chinese Mao sub that didn't hear Cheyenne's torpedoes. Yes, we get the idea that Chinese submariners aren't as well trained as American, but they aren't idiots - any differences should be subtle, not by producing acts of idiocy...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not that RSR was problem free. For example, here is a question:

As a Soviet Captain, when facing down a quiet American sub, what do you need more in that pod-shaped thing you have on your tail:
1) A towed hydroacoustic array.
2) A single use Nixie-like toy that may not even work anyway, when you have MG-74 Korund decoys that will make similar noises stashed somewhere...

As we all know, Clancy picked "2". I understand that there was some debate as to what that pod was at the time which may have extended into RSR's writing, but it is pretty clear storywise which one would actually present a challenge for USS Chicago and maybe prevent a hemorrhage of easy kills.

Or this: As a Soviet Captain in ambush, you suddenly hear an American sub running from randomly airdropped torpedoes. You will be provided with a brief and invaluable opportunity to establish a position and engage with an aimed shot rather than a snapshot in the dark. American subs have notoriously low reserve buoyancies due to their single hull structure, so any hull-cracker will likely do. You will engage with:
1) A SS-N-16 Stallion airdropping a Type 40. If you move fast and attack while he's running, he might not even hear your launch transient and even if he did, he will probably be busy running from the torp about to land on him in seconds.
2) A regular torpedo which will definitely betray your bearing and give him minutes to evade while shooting back with a Mark 48 with double your torpedo's acquisition range due to American electronic superiority.

Notice the conspicious lack of any ASW missiles during the hunt. Based on the NATO code designations, I find it difficult to believe NATO does not know about these ASW missiles.

Or how about: You are a storywriter. After writing a killfest of Soviet subs by American attack subs, you finally create a smart Soviet Captain that evened out the odds. One-on-one, sonar versus maneuverability. You will:
1) Actually sit down and think of some intelligent tactic for the American so he wins.
2) Be cheap and bring in a Brit sub with MagicWeapon, eliminating your need to think, or maybe because you used your page allotment describing the killfest in excessive detail before this most important section.

[Driftwood]

ALL RIGHT ALREADY! So I'm no literary critic AND it is a book from an "old" PC game. I enjoyed Star Wars too and there's NOTHING real in that. Try Rise to Victory! I thought that was excellent! But then, what the @#$% to I know. :shifty:

[Pax Melmacia]

I haven't played the game, but I'm wondering if it was like 'Seawolf", which was more of a 'game' as opposed to a simulation. In that, the sub's targeting, etc., was basically idiot-proof.

Too, IMHO Mr. Clancy is kind of a flag-waver, so it may not be surprising that his hardware is ocassionally endowed with super powers (or the enemy dumber'n lawn cigars).

[TLAM Strike]

Too, IMHO Mr. Clancy is kind of a flag-waver, so it may not be surprising that his hardware is ocassionally endowed with super powers (or the enemy dumber'n lawn cigars).But that flag happens to be the Union Jack… that traitor! :P

[Linton]

Perhaps Clancy forgot you left the empire in the 1770's!

[AntEater]

That was how I felt on SSN too.
RSR is at least well written, even if the Chicago mission is a killfest.
But keep in mind that Clancy had to do with publicized data about soviet subs.
SSN (the novel) is simply boring. Funny is in the novel Cheyenne killed everybody, and in the game I always got killed
:D
SSN (the game) had one mistake..
It was a helmsman's sim, you had to lay rudder and dive planes and maneuvering the sub really took some skill. I never got to periscope depth without broaching
All that stuff is something no sub skipper has to bother about, he simply orders the helmsmen to do that.

[Etienne]

I'd like to know if anybody has read both SSN and Teeth of the Tiger...

Which one was worst? :lol:

[OneShot]

Clearly SSN. Teeth of the Tiger was actually an improvement compared with Red Rabbit which really took some effort to read all the way through without falling asleep every two minutes. Red Rabbit was his cheapest shot in my eyes.

Still he did good with RSR and the Jack Ryan universe, surely wouldn't be up for a Nobel prize in literature, but I have read those books more then once each (with the sole exception of Red Rabbit - Once was more then enough).

[Grayback]

Didn't Clancy have help from a royal navy officer?I

Yeah, probably the same guy who ghosts for Pat Robinson

have read the book and it is not good.I have never played the game but the book is just a script of what to do.

I picked up the game about 8 years ago. I knew it wasn't realistic, but the sound and visual effects are still diverting - doppler effects on torpedoes, creacking noises at extreme depths, plant noises, that sort of thing. Those fake newscasts were kind of annoying. Strangely enough, the easiest kills of the game were the supersubs at the end - the Mao & that Chinese Typhoon; the hardest levels were the one where you had to protect that other sub.

[Grayback]

Well, let's put it this way. By the end of the book, Cheyenne has sunk the Chinese navy thrice over!

and about three times as many Alfas as were ever actually built.

I have both the game and the book, and the game is a VASTLY simplified sub sim. It's not really meant to be very realistic at all.

I wouldn't have minded if you at least had a 3-D viewer. Since the game was built around a spot view of your sub, they could have jazzed it up like the one in SC - more angles and distances, and on objects other than your sub. The sad thing is that Clancy missed out on the resurgent interest in cold war nuc warfare that coincided with "Blind Man's Bluff". Whether the book is accurate or not is one thing, but it stretched attention spans on the subject, leading to many copycat books and Discovery-Channel shows. Had Clancy gotten his timing right and built SSN around a more historic cold war scenario, he might have sold more games.

You can catch my review on Amazon.com

[Grayback]

Or how about: You are a storywriter. After writing a killfest of Soviet subs by American attack subs, you finally create a smart Soviet Captain that evened out the odds. One-on-one, sonar versus maneuverability. You will:
1) Actually sit down and think of some intelligent tactic for the American so he wins.
2) Be cheap and bring in a Brit sub with MagicWeapon, eliminating your need to think, or maybe because you used your page allotment describing the killfest in excessive detail before this most important section.

The end of the kill-fest actually struck me rather well - it seemed that Clancy actually had your two choices and thought that the first one was more of a "Hollywood Ending" sort of resolution, whereas the other (and chosen) one was anti-climactic and a reminder that war doesn't follow a script with a satisfying ending.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

The end of the kill-fest actually struck me rather well - it seemed that Clancy actually had your two choices and thought that the first one was more of a "Hollywood Ending" sort of resolution, whereas the other (and chosen) one was anti-climactic and a reminder that war doesn't follow a script with a satisfying ending.

That would have been acceptable, if he hadn't been writing a killfest right up to that point.