agree 100% to the topic

Can anyone answer me? How is this game dynamic?

...and a statement: did'nt the devs promise that we would'nt sink the
same capital ship twice?

Yea, that was a big one for me as well. While I am not certain I have been told you can sink 50 battleships and there will still be more. :down:

The only way that objectives like "Sink x tonnes merchant shipping" would make sense is if they represented strategic goals that apply to all forces, not just your boat. I wonder if the campaign engine can keep track of sinkings by AI boats? :hmmm: If that is the case, it might be worth keeping those objectives to show the course of the war, but represent it in such a way that the player sees he is just one of many who are contributing to the effort.

The "sink x carriers" is of course total rubbish.

To sum up.

SHV is a blank board full of garbage and trash that could need a heavy modding and remove DRM to become a good submarine sim.

it could need about one year, perhaps two.

Back to the Pacific for me. I just can't get into this arcade game.

Well, I did a little testing last week and even shot a torpedo down the length of a ship, bow to stern, approx 1m below the keel. Slow speed, magnetic... nothing. I fired about 20 others at 90° AoB (using the test mission that goes with the 'BARF' mod), and not one of those went off either. All steam, all slow speed.

I found that if I set the depth by the graphic shown on the torpedo controls (e.g. 1m under the keel according to the image), they always struck the bottom of the ship. Setting them lower and watching them run just underneath, they never go off. :nope:


Anyway, back to the campaign. I'm not far through it yet, still in Nov '39, but overall I prefer the presentation of it to SH3. It is more interesting to have a general goal to accomplish over several patrols, and even have a choice of objectives (perhaps not historical, but adds a bit of variety for the player). Of course, the tonnage requirements are too high, and all the talk of warship requirements seems very 'arcade' too - I was surprised to see the task to sink a carrier in the Total Germany part I'm on currently.

If some tasks are not completed, I didn't think it was 'game over' though? Do the branching options become more limited, or does the game become harder later? (Perhaps extra mission-editor layers are 'enabled' to make it tougher). I thought it was supposed to work like that, somehow - and that's where the 'dynamic' part comes into it. It's too early for me to know, anyway.

But overall, in my opinion, the SH5 campaign format is good, but the actual tasks and requirements are not.

I feel SH5 would benefit from two campaign 'modes' - one being roughly historical and one being casual (which is what we have now). Of course, casual gamers surely want to go hunting big warships - that's probably the most 'cool/fun' thing to do. Having two modes would require a lot more development time (two separate campaigns) so no surprise we don't have such a feature.

I'm not looking forward to progressing in the war so much now, having just read of all those later tasks to go sink more warships!

I don't know, I'd take up golf simulations if they had air strikes:rotfl2:.

In my (admittedly worthless) opinion, after nearly 4 weeks of playing and trying to mod this turd into something enjoyable, I have decided that Silent Hunter 5 is essentially like Cotton Candy...all pretty and full of fluff, but with virtually no substance or merit whatsoever.

...and like Cotton Candy, although it was tasty for a short while at the begining, the more I dig into it...the more sick to my stomach I become.

It all would not be so bad if I had ORDERED Cotton Candy, but I waited years and spent $50 for a first-class steak dinner from a 5-star restaurant with a first-class chef...but apparently the restaurant fired the chef and hired a clown in his place who, instead of my promised steak, brought me this fluffy and sweet but completely empty travesty instead.


Silent Hunter 5 appears to have been produced by people who were completely oblivios to history...both the history of WWII AND the history of what made the Silent Hunter franchise so successful before.

Until now, I had thought that it was "PT Boats: Knights of the Sea" that was the most monumental failure of reaching it's core audience in the history of gaming. It too was to be a beautiful and highly anticipated simulation touted for years in development as being the pinnacle of realism and design...and it too was released full of arcadish fluff aimed directly toward the ADHD & prozac-numbed masses. Silent Hunter 5 was supposed to be better than that, and in a way it was...at reaching those same sugar-numbed zombies.

25 knot Type VII's?
1939 convoys full of Liberty Ships?
Sink 5 Capital ships in one patrol?


Nah, no thanks...Trigger Maru is calling me back to my tropical paradise. :sunny:


:salute:

Same here. though I claim copyright on the name Golf Strike: 18 holes of Armageddon!:haha:

:yep:

sh3 = When someone sank the Hood and posted it on this forum, it was a big deal, it is rare and not everyone had even seen it before.

Sh5 = Everyone is required to sink the same ships, so if some one sinks the Hood annd posted it on this forum, We are like " Oh ! you finnaly got past that level, wow good for you, I did it twice yesterday.

The more and more I think of this, the harder and harder it is to play this game. I never had this problem with 3.

the other big problem is finding said ship as well. you dont always stumble into a carrier or BB every day.

Somehow I get the feeling that the AI taskforces are sailing deliberately in my path? Almost on every patrol I find myself near a taskforce (usually with a Battleships or Carrier) without even looking for them. Could be just coincidence, but I find it freaky.

@Placoderm & Sgtmonkeynads - AGREE 1000%


The sad truth is it's all in the name of numbers. People want to sink carriers and battleships - it's exciting to see a capital ship going under. But atleast to me, it was a hell of lot more fun when you all of a sudden, ran into an old Nelson escorting a convoy in the Western Approaches. They want to make the game more exciting/approachable to the masses as they hope it will sell more units. Hell, they're making games dumber and dumber every day. They're even porting the "hard-core" simulator titles to the consoles (IL2, supposedly MS Flight Sim)! :timeout: This is probably the unfortunate future, so hold on to your copies of SH3/4... we'll look back fondly in years to come :nope:

And btw - Where can I go to reserve my copy of Golf Strike? Sounds fun, but does it have the Sex Rehab By The Bay: Bonus 9 Hole Course Pack? I'm not getting it if it doesn't. :shifty:

I remember that a few weeks ago, after I've played SH5 the first time, and I was saying that is a crappy game, there were a lot of people that thrown stones at me, saying that I don't show enough positivity. Positivity for what?? Anyway, since Rubini's and Seeadler Wide Screen mod attempt on SH3, I am back to that game, SH5 is unplayable in my opinion, I've gave this Alpha or Beta stage RPG/Arcade game enough chances.