SHIV Active War

[Vaulcan]

With the silent hunter sim range, one thing you feel allways is your the only person in the world. A very lonely time you have at sea. with SH3 we had the people at dock waving you of/home, who never seem to leave. but anywere else the world is oh so quiet. It would be a great site to have the war on land AND sea to rage on. Being a navel based sim you would expect to have the great battles at sea in-game, or at least the important ones. The "Wolfpack" hunting is yet to be used in silent hunter too, even other uboats on there own patrols would be a good deal better. But the land is a ghost town. not that you would need things going on far in-land were you would'n see, but on coasts like Normandy,DunKirk, Etc.

To be close enough to watch the sinking of the bismark or find other u-boats at sea and contact them would make setting sail on patrol a real delight.To know thw war goes on around you also would make gameplay alot more intresting. Also be more active at base and have more rooms to explore on-board your u-boat would be a bonus. Oh and maybe not having every crew member looking like the same 4 faces!

V

[Subnuts]

Would we really need to see the Normandy invasion happening in a Pacific sim? :confused:

[Torplexed]

Seems to be that a lot of people still haven't caught on to the fact that SHIV is gonna be set in the Pacific. Maybe they shoud rename it Pacific Hunter. :hmm:

[Vaulcan]

thay were just i.e's say pearl harbor or somit then.

[gdogghenrikson]

Would we really need to see the Normandy invasion happening in a Pacific sim? :confused:


Why not!

[Drebbel]

Would we really need to see the Normandy invasion happening in a Pacific sim? :confused:


Why not!

I agree. Actually I think it is of utmost importance that we will be able to see the Battle of Stalingrad as well !

[Onkel Neal]

Don't forget the Alamo!!

[Safe-Keeper]

Taking a break from the teasing: "Active war", as you put it so splendidly, has been suggested before numerous times. It was meant to be in Silent Hunter III, too, but the game was rushed, so... No:cry:.

Houses, camp-fires, huts, villages, docks, fishing boats, and so on would be great, but what I want to see is some land-based fighting. Tanks and infantry actually fighting it out on the ground, planes strafing/bombing them, and so on. It doesn't need to be an advanced AI system or high-polygon models, just something basic (it'd be awesome to see first-wave LSTs and Higgins boats actually deploy tanks and marines on Iwo Jima following shore bombardment, for then to have follow-up LSTs deploy trucks, ambulances and such after the battle is over).

In Silent Hunter III, all you had was no ground units at all, just stationary installations that you can't even destroy.

[Vaulcan]

Yea safe-keeper, thats what im talking about. this is why i do not post hardly in these forums or use the multiplayer for S.HIII as there is a bad feel in the S.H commumity, apart form adults using this sim because of its historic backround. thanks for the proper reply, i agree it would be great to see some land action. i must say i if i had a choice between adding the war on land or a more active war at sea, i would have more sea action, what do you think?

[bookworm_020]

It would be nice to see other battles in SHIV, even iif you don't contribute to it, such as a dogfight duel or air attack.

It doesn't have to be a work of art, but it would be nice to see it.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

Sea war. But seeing the battle of the Philpines would be cool. Or the fight of Taffy 4(right #?)

[Vaulcan]

yea low poly' AI carrying on the war. I think we need to see other U-Boats and Subs that our on our side, that way we could send a radio contact to a near by friendly Sub or ship or base, send say a may-day or for some other reasons. All of these things would take away the lonely feeling you get on patrol. I would allso like to see the use of the "deck" on our subs/U-boats. lets see our crew unload the torpedos to bring below ya know? or when diving the crew must come down the coning tower and passed the com' to get to there bunks. all we get is the sound effect. lets see our crew "move".

[Immacolata]

Sounds sort of utopian to me. why bother yourselves with details that does not contribute to the game? I'm with as far as having coastal installations exchanging fire with attacking ships or planes. But on a limited budget, and we know SHIv is being on quite a limited budget, I would much much rather have the lads program stuff that makes the actual gameplay better. Immersion is good, but there's also a point where the simulation becomes a bit of a fetish.

[DS]

It's a submarine simulation. They should pour 100% of the dev budget into making a very detailed simulation of submarine warfare. Personally, if my periscope is poking out of the water for more than 15 seconds at a time, I am seriously messing up. I ain't there to watch machine gun fights on the beach. That is some other game.

[Safe-Keeper]

Why bother yourselves with details that does not contribute to the game?You mean, like 3D compartments, seagulls and dolphins;)?

Immersion is good, but there's also a point where the simulation becomes a bit of a fetish.What's wrong with that:p?

By the way, didn't Silent Hunter have tanks that could at least shoot, if not move?

[DS]

[quote]By the way, didn't Silent Hunter have tanks that could at least shoot, if not move?

No, it did not. It was a pure and classic subsim, and for many, the model that SH4 should be built on. Other than the captain's log book and the calendar, there was nothing you could operate in the game that was not permanently bolted onto your submarine.

I agree that nicer graphics and interior compartments OF A SUBMARINE contribute to a submarine simulation. Anything that I should not be operating, or should not be normally seeing as a submarine captain, is extra fluff, and needs to be very critically looked at (in my view) before deciding to take development money and effort away from the submarine simulation itself to devote to that.

Personally, I could live without ANY graphical improvements over SH3, if I could get realistic tide tables, currents, navigational problems and hazards, and more detailed boat operations instead.

But then, I'm just a lowly submarine simulation fanatic...

[Takeda Shingen]

Don't forget the Alamo!!

I'd like to see Gettysburg. Perhaps Agincourt and Waterloo could be on an expansion disk: Silent Hunter IV--History's Greatest Battles

[Safe-Keeper]

Personally, I could live without ANY graphical improvements over SH3, if I could get realistic tide tables, currents, navigational problems and hazards, and more detailed boat operations instead.Here I agree with you. Silent Hunter III's graphics are just fine and need no improvement. It'd be nice if some parts were prettier (trees and environment, for example, and some more things like rainbows, northern light, dolphins, whales, waterfalls, and so on), but the quality of it doens't need to be higher than that of our Atlantic sub sim.

I'd like to see Gettysburg. Perhaps Agincourt and Waterloo could be on an expansion disk: Silent Hunter IV--History's Greatest BattlesStorming Gettysburg with a Gato... Hmmm...
It'd need tracks, though.

[Sailor Steve]

Dang! If General Lee had one o' them dessert, or dizzle, or whatever you calls em, submerthings instead o' that Hunley, We'd a' won the war!

[rcs929]

As with most games there is a core concept & anything other than that is just a plus. For example: Submarine game = Drive sub and sink ships while not getting sunk. Anything else is a plus. Some games provide better illusions than others.

I can understand where DS is coming from regarding feeling alone within the game, I used to be like that with SH2. But I had merchant shipping to sink so I couldn't think about that much.

But having the crew, even with their four faces, and radio traffic in SH3 seems to cure that for me though. As for land battles, meh...I'm out at sea to sink merchant tonnage. Sometimes I wish I had more to do such as in SH2 I would write in the patrol log. But in the end I really don't want to be doing piles of paperwork and solving personnel problems when I can be on the conning tower with my lawnchair & beer! :lol: With SH3 I do look at the axis/allies/neutral city colors to view how the war is progressing because I'm out in the expansive ocean wastelands.

Now, where's the thermal layers at this time around? :smug:

[DS]

I can understand where DS is coming from regarding feeling alone within the game, I used to be like that with SH2. But I had merchant shipping to sink so I couldn't think about that much.


Umm, thanks for the mention, but that was not me that said that (about feeling alone and all).

I am fine with an enhanced and dynamic environment AT SEA, I just don't think the goings on in a land battle were within the scope of information or concern to a sub skipper, so I think is a waste of development time and money, not to mention CPU resources, to model it when so much MORE can be done with what's going on at sea that can bot haffect your sub, and that you can actually do something about.

[Immacolata]

Yes, more sub sim. Less teh sexing up of the game. Its sexy enough as it is. We want no more bimbo sim, we want a smart sim with glasses and a degree.

[Capt. D]

Here I agree with you. Silent Hunter III's graphics are just fine and need no improvement. It'd be nice if some parts were prettier (trees and environment, for example, and some more things like rainbows, northern light, dolphins, whales, waterfalls, and so on), but the quality of it doens't need to be higher than that of our Atlantic sub sim.


I have to agree also. The graphics are fine on SHIII. I think the "improvement" should be in the amount of available "views". As I stated in other "Threads", the conning tower was the "battle center" when attacking. We should be able to see that along with the control room. Let's see the torpedo tubes being loaded. Let's see the gun crew come on deck during surface action. Let's have views of the engine rooms or the manuvering room. Let's have the officers in the ward room discussing the mission or what is going on...etc, etc.. Some "space" within the program can be had with the elimination of the "birds eye view"s that SHII and III have of the sub on the surface. It's nice and I use it just to change the view, but really it is not needed or very realistic. Also the underwater view. Again a nice fluff feature but really not very realistic. Keep the graphics to the real action and real sub. Leave the fluff out!:)

This notion that one should be able to see land battles etc.,:down: Unless the mission included a drop off or pick up of a shore party/commando raid/coast watchers - the only time I know of a Sub Capt. getting involved in shoot 'em up was John Wayne in "Operation Pacific". I really believe these type of missions should be included in the sim but only from the perspective of the sub. Let's see the party depart or embark the sub but that should be all. If they are taking fire from the shore line then by all means open up with your 4 or 5" deck gun etc. (By the way an "improvement" on the graphics could be actually seeing a downed pilot being brought aboard!:p) Other than that this is a sub sim leave the tank battles to Patton.

An improved part could be the addition of seeing "news reels" either while in port or watching in the forward torp. room - as movies were shown there at times. Also, as has been mentioned by others in other "Threads" - let's have the ability to "hear" Tokyo Rose or other announcements on the war in both theaters of ops. progress over the 1MC per the Capt.s instructions.

As others have said - this is a sub sim we need to understand that first!

Happy Hunting :ping: