Question for actual NYGM 2.0/earlier GW 1.1 players

[jaxa]

I've noticed many players play NYGM 2.0 for realism. I still play GW 1.1 but I'd like to know something about feelings of players, who earlier played GW 1.1 and now play NYGM 2.0. Is NYGM better than GW or GW better than NYGM? Who played GW, next NYGM and GW again? I played RUb 1.45, next GW 1.1 (I was very satisfied to play GW instead of RUb) and I don't want to break my existing career.

[Ducimus]

I honestly havent played either one, but it's my understanding that NYGM, and GW differ primarly be design philopshy.

NYGM, to my understanding, strives for the utmost historically accurate game that can be achieved. Generaly speaking this mods primarly goal besides exacting historical accuracy is to make the game more difficult for the player.


GW, to my understanding strives to deliver a game that is as historically accurate as possible without sacraficing much in the way of gameplay, and will make compromises between the two to attempt to deliver an engaging sub experience reminiceant of the movie Das Boat.

I think which mod to use, depends on your philosphy in how you like to play SH3.

[MaxenThor]

I asked a similiar question here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=94123). This should answer your question.

[bigboywooly]

Each to their own I say:D
May there always be a choice

Havent played NYGM 2 so cant answer
Played the 1.03 version then discoverd GW1.1 and havent looked back but thats my preference and everybody will have their own

[CCIP]

What is "better"? :hmm:


Nothing clear-cut here. For my preferences, NYGM's U-boat/sensor changes are absolutely essential, they add hours and hours of gameplay to SHIII by being far more challenging and I dare say realistic.

On the other hand, other people might want to spend those hours elsewhere. i.e. certainly there's more than one SHIII player who would rather spend two hours blowing up merchants and racking up tonnage than two hours evading a pesky corvette in shallow waters and being stuck to virtual immobility when approaching a convoy submerged (more than 1kt and you're caught! And even at that you might still be caught...).

[Myxale]

I gotta agree with CCIP!

I personaly have 4 SH3 installs. GW 1.1 ; NYGM 2.0; Old RUB; and ,my own mix.

[bigboywooly]

Have 4 installs also - A stock for modding ( loads quicker ) GW for modding, A GW I use to actually play lol now and again and Uboat war ace 1.6

I find that the limited amount of time I get to play I get a better mix from GW - I still get pinned down with a couple of DD and dont always get away either so I am happy with the mix I use

[jaxa]

I'm very satisfied playing GW, I think it's good balance between history and fun.
I think GW team didn't say last word yet.:up:

[Ducimus]

Im sorry i coudlnt resist....

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y122/Otohiko/win1.gif

So according to him, RL was easier then the (presumably then unmodded) game? So, whats realistic then? :hmm:

:rotfl:

[jaxa]

Oesten was active Uboot Kaleun up to April 1945, but I think it's only Ubisoft's advertising.

[CCIP]

He didn't say it about SHIII however. It's not specified which game he referred to, though it's likely to be AoD. (But also remember that the stock sensors in late game are absolute murder).

Realistic is what ultimately matches up to outcomes, I think. Out in WaW, it's a very easy thing to trace, since you have dozens of players doing DiD with a similar game config. There is absolutely no doubt from comparing tonnages/u-boat losses that default/RUb/earlier NYGM were far easier than they should have been.

[joea]

Thing is ... IRL "dead is DEAD" no reload (none even if buddhists are right, you come back as something else, another "game") . That's the main difference for me.

[Ducimus]

Well if you want realistic:

By 42-43. You'd be lucky to see a grand total 3 ships on a patrol. Only 1 of which your able to succesfully attack. The allies have rerouted all shipping from your AO, since their reading your cyphers.

Youd be spending more time in/going back to port due to sabotauge then acutally patrolling.


Planes would be able to spot your boats silloutte when up to 30 meters deep, and bomb your butt!

You'd be lucky to be able to recharge your batteries uninterupted on one surfacing.

The snorkel that everyone loves so much in 43 isnt really available tell 44, and then Not everyone gets one.

Radar doesnt work for ****, and is constantly broke.

Any damage to your boat renders you unable to dive. In SH3' terms, at 90% H.I, you shouldn't be able to dive.

Electric torpedo's have a chance to randomly detonate in their tubes if not properly, and meticusly cared for.



Im sure i can go on. Most of what i mentioned is "realistic", and im sure can be rendered into the game to some degree. The question is, just how far do you want to go with realsim? The first item i mention alone is enough to make me stop playing. Having nothing to shoot at is boring.

[CCIP]

That's why the key word is "preferences". No need to alienate either side - that's why we have both GW and NYGM around, along with a bunch of other options.

People may play however they want to play, by all means. Realism is a bonus for me, in the way that I understand it anyway. I could live with sinking little - I like to work for my kills, I like to work for my escapes.

For WaW purposes - it's a simulation community, we want our simulation to be all... simulation-y. :hmm:

For me, the gameplay lies in realism and difficulty. I really could care less what I sink. Some of my best patrols I barely sunk anything. Most of my careers in late war ended after only 1-2 patrols. But I haven't stopped playing SHIII in a year thanks to all the improvements it gets to the realism department.

I like to have to do an appropriate amount of 'work' for my kills, and I like to feel like my patrol experiences relate as closely as possible to the real counterpart. It makes the imaginary reward sweeter. :p

Part of this, of course, lies in the fact that I was born without a competitive bone in my body and I could care less for playing a U-boat ace. I'm far more interested in SHIII as a U-boat patrol simulator than a U-boat attack simulator.

[Deep Six]

Well I'm at the moment enjoying GW 1.1 with a few extra add-ons (real damage mod, and real DC mod plus a few graphical mods) I'm a family man with little time to ,myself except after m li'l Daughter finally gets to sleep, so from 8pm till 2 am (morning) I'm on the comp.......GW 1.1 allows that little bit extra for me to PLAY the game with out getting bogged down with to much realism, plus from what I have read the new NYGM Tonnage mod if detected can keep you submerged for hours evading DC drops..... That in itself spoils it for me I'd rather be bogged down for say an hour with a good chance to escape then surface and SAVE, to continue my patrol one night on than have to just quit out after being submerged for ages and my time on the comp is up......I'm in no way knocking NYGM 2.0 I have it already D/L just a little too "Anxious" of what it would mean playability wise for me.


Deep Six....

[CCIP]

I still don't get what this "NYGM-o-phobia" some people have is all about :88)

It's good. Really. It adds a lot of gameplay outside the 'click-boom' cycle, making it a lot more challenging to approach your targets and then escape, but at the same time reducing escort accuracy and giving you real chances at all times in the war. Sure you might spend longer in-game, but this is really mainly due to the fact that it adds a lot of time and gameplay to the attacks and evasion. It used to be that you could cruise up to a convoy, hit it, go down and hope they don't hit you in their rather short chase. Now you'll be spending more time before and after the hitting, sneaking in and out. How spending some extra hours being a sneaky bastage before delivering the punishment would NOT be interesting to a sub sim player is beyond me.

Seriously, what kind of sub simmer are you if you just want to blow stuff up? Sinking ships is only scratching the surface gameplay-wise, IMHO :hmm:

[Deep Six]

Seriously, what kind of sub simmer are you if you just want to blow stuff up? Sinking ships is only scratching the surface game play-wise, IMHO :hmm:

Is this Q directed at myself???

I take SH3 as serious as I WANT it to be, just because I do not play the game as you see fit, does not make me a bad or good sub simmer, and as the question to the thread was asking for advice I gave an HONEST opinion as to why I play GW 1.1, without knocking I might add anything that NYGM has to offer, except from what I have already read on this forum.

Cheers

Deep Six

[CCIP]

Oh, sorry, I didn't mean it to seem personally. It's more of a general pondering :dead:

I covered this before. Preferences are the key to everything, I think. My personal preference is with NYGM sensors; but I have to hand it to GW for being open to a wider variety of preferences within their mod. But whereas GW is open from the 'centre-right to left', NYGM is the 'far-right' as far as 'gameplay hardcoreness' goes, I think. For the 'ultimate hardcore', IMHO Tonnage War is where it's at!

By the way, GW's sensors ain't a piece of cake either, and if you think that's where it ends - the GW folks will have some great stuff coming at you in the future :p

For the record, since I keep a limited involvement with both GW and NYGM teams, I support them both equally. They both go to different tangents.

I will suggest, however, that people shouldn't fall for either mod's "propaganda" of either 'super realism' or 'super gameplay' - both have their own quirks and approaches. I think both game mechanics models (which is what these touted 'realism/gameplay' features really are) are worth a try. There's no need to be prejudiced against either - but it's a good idea to try first.

[edit - I hope noone saw my typo of 'Tonnage War' as 'Tonnage ...' :rotfl:]

[Deep Six]

No props CCIP, sorry if I sounded discourteous...... that was not my intent.

Well each to is own and until GW 2.0 is released I might just give NYGM 2.0 a go with one little mod that I might need to add that takes away the broken line for contacts as my Squint is bad enough already......I tried the unified mod for NYGM+GW and this was definitely something I would need to change..


Deep Six

[Ducimus]

I think Realism, and difficulty, are two different things. Generally speaking, something doesnt have to be difficult to be realistic. Ultimatly, when it comes to realism, nobody in this forum, has a real clue what is realistic, for one simple reason. Nobody here ever went on patrol in a real uboat. We can argue what is realistic or what is not based on what we've read. However unless you've really lived it, all your arguing about is statistics from a text book.

Ultimatly, SH3 is a game. No more, no less. Play your game how you like, but what irritates me personnaly, is when people insinuate (either directly, or indirectly) that their way is the only way.

[CCIP]

Well, another thing to add to this would be that "realism" is NOT the same thing as "reality". There's only one reality, but there's many different "realisms" possible in a game. Which is why I say that, to some part, the touting of mods as "ultimate realism" is a bit of propaganda. It doesn't mean that one or another version of realism aren't worth striving for, though.

If ultimate realism is equal to reality, then whoever playing a game and thinking that they're really a U-boat commander probably need help :p

[Ducimus]

You know i was thinking about realistic tonnage. Kind of hard to argue against hard spreadsheet statics.

I dont think realistic tonange is achieved through damage mods, although it helps. See, right now i just finished my first patrol of my new career game using NYGM's TW2 damage mod, and i scored about as much tonnage as i usually do on stock damage settings.

I think realistic tonnage is achieved by having realistic situational awarness.
That means in theory:

- All Map contact updates have to go. Only thing there is YOUR scribbeling.
- Contact reports have to go. (IE the random ones as set by the RND layer).
- External camera has to go.
- Event camera has to go.
-Target locking in bad/dark weather has to go. If you can't see it, you shouldn't be able to "lock" on to it.
-16K visual distance probably needs to be toned down.

Im sure theres one or two other things to bring down, but i'll wager if you implemented at least All of the above, regardless of damage mod, you'll see tonnage scores drop like a rock.

[CCIP]

Well, there's also a huge disparity in torpedo reliability (which I think NYGM damage somewhat compensates for) and just plain mechanical efficiency of the boat. The SHIII boats are monsters of efficiency, they always work no matter what! And when was the last patrol you didn't get to fire all your torpedoes despite getting to and from patrol safely?

There was a nice figure that BdU posted at WaW...

It is estimated that 36,000 torpedeo were carried to sea on patrol, with these 36,000 torpedeos - only around 2,775 ships were sunk.

Now you think about that and what it means about our 'real tonnages' :hmm:

[Ducimus]

Duds and misses. Thats a given. Please, don't go ultra realistic on me unless you play at 1 X TC. Because anything less isn't realistic! ;) Uboat skippers couldnt fast forward time like a VCR! So from the word go, your not playing realisticly! :D (poke in ribs ;) )

Anyway im not talking about what someone quoting donitz at WaW says. Im talking about why players score more tonnage then what was recorded in history. Duds and misses aside, players have too much info. Unless im mistaken, the majority of mods are acutally graphical ones. I think that says something.

[CCIP]

Well, I don't exactly use map contacts, or external camera, or any other graphical aids, but I'm still known to rack up a lot of tonnage even with completely manual targeting. I think there's more to it than just 'hints', my point is that the boats themselves are far too reliable. That's why I wish the Sabotage mod would be out in full and soon. :hmm:

[Ducimus]

my point is that the boats themselves are far too reliable.

I already mentioned that and i think it would be self defeating to SH3 as a game. You may as well not even play if you want to add in sabatage. If memory serves me correctly fron what ive read, U505, in 43, spent more time in port then it did on patrol.

Small holes would be drilled into the fuel bunkers so it left a rainbow colord slick. Weilders would weld in cord within the welds to weaken the weld so the PH would break under pressure. Metal filings were tossed into the diesals, the list went on and on.

When a uboat departed they'd do a final test dive before "really" leaving. This is when they'd find many of these defects, and more often then not if something was found, it would be something that would force them to return to port. They kept going back until they said Hell with it, or it was fixed.

If you want to cut back tonange that would be a great way, personnaly id rather play the game then be in port all the time. Oh i know, you just go to sea with the broken stuff like they really did! Umm, no. What id do what they'd really DID do, id return to port, and then restart a new patrol, and keep on doing that until the boat was as it should be, or the breakdown that occured was minor.

[Ducimus]

For what its worth CCIP, i really dont mean to argue with you. For some reason the topic of realism just gets me irritable, and I dont really understand why. I think its a "My way is the right way" mentality i sometimes think i see manifest itself. Of course following that change of subject would bring us full circle back to the choice of mods.