SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Forced retirement (merged)

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=202)

- - Forced retirement (merged) (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=109507)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Quote:

How is this a bug? Please clarify. It seems to me it works as intended. Now if you are given the option to continue on, this would be a feature. Now please clarify how this is construed as a bug.

Seems to me if it is something you do not like is it shelved as a bug. Very odd.....

Quote:

Its like watching Bill Clinton take the stand...

"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

Sadly, we never got a straight answer from Bill either. How do you contend that having your career terminated at 5 patrols is a bug?

All the apologistic pseudo-rationalization & mental gymnastics cant force me to reinvent the wheel here. But I invite you to continue the hand wringing, as I find it mildly amusing.

Anyhow, if sending 100,000 tons to the bottom on (1942) patrol #2, then being forcibly retired along with your Tambor (no option to extend due to 'poor performance') isnt a bug, what is?

A problem that happens once is a quirk. A problem that happens twice is a bug. A problem that can be replicated on a consistent basis is a ROARING BLOODTHIRSTY FLESHEATING BUG! Even if it was designed into the game :rotfl:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grunt

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Quote:

Its like watching Bill Clinton take the stand...

"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

Sadly, we never got a straight answer from Bill either. How do you contend that having your career terminated at 5 patrols is a bug?

You still have not answered the question..... How is ending your career that is modelled into the game as a part of realism considered a 'bug' as you have classified it. No hand wringing here mate, just looking for a straight answer and not any beating around the bush like you have because you seem not to have a legitimate answer to this seemly simple question. No one is asking for a wheel to be reinvented, just a simple answer from you. From what I gather, things in the game you do like somehow turn into a 'bug'. This career ending model seems to be one of them. So please, astound me with a well educated extrapolation on why this action of career termination is a 'bug'.

Quote:

I've read through the millions of 'forced termination' threads and posts and seems
that there is a great deal of confusion on this issue/non-issue/many issues.

My understanding is :

#1a The intended funtionality is that the game retires you at a certain point in keeping with realism. This is fine, though the consensus is it should be an option. This is not a bug.

#1b In case of 1a, you should be offered the chance to opt to stay in the war, at the cost of some renown. Some players have stated this is around 700 renown. This again is not a bug.

#2 There appears to be a bug reported by some poeple whereby you are retired if the boat class you started the war with ( irregardless of which class of boat you have now) is retired from service. This can be confused with point #1a, as it will appear to the player to be arbitrary and not have anything to do with performance. This is a bug.

In short, it seems to me many people who are experiencing point #2 (which is a bug) are confusing it with point #1 (which is not). I think what is fuelling the confusion is that we have no idea at which threshhold the game decides you are to be retired.

Assuming my observations are correct, it would be great to get from the devs some idea of which factors are considered in this whole retirement business.

This poster seems to know how to get it across concerning how it is considered a bug.

Did either of you (AVGWarhawk, Grunt) read my post on the previous page? It looks like you're both arguing about apples and oranges. You're both correct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galanti

Did either of you (AVGWarhawk, Grunt) read my post on the previous page? It looks like you're both arguing about apples and oranges. You're both correct.

Just put it in my unfinished post but you are correct and know how to provide a great answer.

Bah. Returning to Fremantle after a succesfull tenth patrol in june 1943. When I arrive there it seems my base has been changed, but someone forgot to notify me. 'K s**t happens, and I've heard many a skipper complain about it, so I simply go to Brisbane to see if I could dock there.
Goody, I can! Only to be told that my current class of submarine (uh-huh, a mint condition Balao class, only used for 4 weeks, not a scratch on it) will be retired from the front line, with me -the entire navy's most succesful sub skipper- along with it.

I love this game, but I've been tiptoeing around its many, many bugs and quirks for too many hours since its release. But enough is enough. I'm thoroughly disappointed, and this time it's me who's doing the mothballing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galanti

So which file/files control when a boat class is retired? Wouldn't setting the retirement date for all classes to 1/1/46 effectively kill the bug?

There are at least two "Forced Retirement" and "Forced Termination" threads you could have posted on. You didn't have to start a new one.

There are a lot more than 2 thread on the forced retirement. A quick use of the forum search showed a half dozen on the first page alone.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ght=Retirement

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ght=Retirement

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ght=Retirement

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ght=Retirement

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ght=Retirement

However, to save the OP some time. One the first thread I posted above, Galanti summed up the issue nicely on the second page:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galanti

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

There are at least two "Forced Retirement" and "Forced Termination" threads you could have posted on. You didn't have to start a new one.

Feel free to delete this thread, then.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightmare

There are a lot more than 2 thread on the forced retirement.

I did say "at least".:sunny:

Im happy to say its easily fixed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Im happy to say its easily fixed.

:up:

Poor Juju, he forgot the standard modus here at subsim.

For a clarification, please look up the term "Apologist", or a brief description below.

Colloquial usage

Today the term "apologist" is colloquially applied in a general manner to include groups and individuals systematically promoting causes, justifying orthodoxies, or denying certain events, even of crimes. Apologists have been characterized as being deceptive, or "whitewashing" their cause, primarily through omission of negative facts (selective perception) and exaggeration of positive ones, techniques of classical rhetoric.

Put simply Juju, had you made a post about how utterly perfect and fantastic SH4 is, the moderators would leave you alone...or perhaps even let you into their little circle.

BUT! In keeping with the above methods, you will now be browbeaten into submission using standard Orwellian tactics.

We hope you enjoyed this public service message, and remember our motto:

PAY YOUR DAMNED MONEY, KEEP YOU FREAKIN TRAP SHUT!

Thank you, and have a nice day.

No, I doubt that will fix anything because the organic calculation system the career structure uses is borked into oblivion.

Its as if black is white, up is down, and left is right. So sinking lots of enemy ships is a sin punishable by forced retirement for "poor performance".

As I have tried to explain at length, and the apologists have ignored, even if the career track were based on "realism" its implementation is completely defective, ergo BIG FAT BUG!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grunt

Put simply Juju, had you made a post about how utterly perfect and fantastic SH4 is, the moderators would leave you alone...or perhaps even let you into their little circle.

I would like to take this opportunity to say that I am not now, nor have I ever been a moderator. Further, if asked I will not run, and if elected I will not serve.

I'm just a guy who reads all the threads I can every day, and when I see one that matches all the others I like to give somebody grief over it, partly because I hate reading the same thing over on a new thread, partly because I hate it when I think somebody didn't look around to see what was what, and partly because I'm envious, because I can't play the game myself!

I also hate it when people make the high-handed accusation that anyone who complains will automatically get dumped on, while anyone who praises will automatically be allowed to. I think that shows more than a little prejudice of a different kind.

Thank you, I was having a nice day until you had to expose my standard Orwellian tactics and horrible browbeating!:dead: