And you really believe that ? ;)

I agree, as it appears many do, that there should be some activity on a torpedoed boat. However if you are 1,000 + yards out you may(?) here some shouting etc. but I can't believe you'd actually hear "Abandon Ship". Also, this would mean that you are on the surface correct? What if you are submerged?

Let's have more graphics to the actual explosions and follow up explosions. If we are on the surface enhance the sounds let's here the 'far-away distant' shouting and maybe even the collision alarms - especially if it's a warship! Also if we are submerged let's here better underwater sounds of the explosions and the breaking up of sinking ships.

Again we want this to be a realistic sim - let's keep it as close as we can, with the space of RAM in the equation, vs all the other features we want.

Happy Hunting :ping:

Personnally I think it would make it easier to tell if you've mortally wounded a ship if you see crew diving overboard, and lifeboats lowering. It would save on ammo since it "is" very limited, and as a captain, you must be very conservative with how you spend that ammo. Every torpedo saved is a new potential target sunk.

Also, the oilslick burning goes out way to soon, and I have yet to see a tanker engulfed in flames from the cargo leaking into the water and setting ablaze, crew on fire jumping into the water. Morality or not, it was a war, and if there is any concern about the kiddies seeing it, (you should see some the stuff that's targeted for the younger audiences.)

Your own sailors can be wounded or killed by enemy actions, so I think it should be the same for those you target. Also, your own men, especially watch crewmen, if wounded or killed while you're sufaced, could have fallen off the boat if their life lines were cut, or unclasped trying to get below for diving.

But it would also be nice to hear the sounds on the warships that come after you too, like the destroyer sirens, and bells as they man battle stations.

To sum it up for me, I do enjoy the game, and it's just a game, but without some of the particulars that are missing, it leaves a feeling of sterillity to the gameplay. War is war, and lives are lost, acts of chivalry and courage occur. Leave it as an option to the game if it's that important.

That's just my take on the subject, even though it's been discussed previously, many times.

Give me a reason not to.

Hydrophones or external view:p.

And the crew vanishing in thin air when a ship sinks is just so realistic.

The "She's going down!"-note does it for me, but what the Heck.

I don't recall anyone saying they're concerned about kiddies seeing it. To the Hot Place with the kids, this is a teen/adult game.

But they just vanish, too.

Definetly.

My sentinents exactly. Leave it an option.

Hydrophones ok but bring the quality up. External view(?) what one sees from the bridge or deck is fine:D - but hold on the "birds eye views":down:

No - but keep it in the frame of what would have taken place and what would have been seen. If I torpedo a ship (when surfaced or submerged) let me see what I would have seen on the bridge or through the scope. The closer I get to the ship the more detail would be seen. Men climbing down or jumping off ship - life boats etc. is all fine as long as it is from the perspective of what could and would be seen and heard.:)

Happy Hunting :ping:

Do you really think you could hear people yelling and abandoning ship through the hydrophones? I don't.

And you're complaining about realism?:rotfl:

Actually, I agree; lifeboats would be a great addition, as long as they were invisible to bullets (but of course a lot of folks would complain about that).

In SH III they made the seagulls unshootable, as well as the band etc.....

they should make all those items 'live' in the coming edition and leave the ethical choices to the players indeed....

If they want to 'guide' the players into certain behaviour, they could give huge penalties for strafing lifeboats/allies etc....it would also add to the realism factor, besides the strafing of lifeboats happened at least on one occasion, so it is historical....

The Red Cross Hospital Ship has, as we all know, been added to Silent Hunter III. No one's complaining, and if you sink it, you get executed or whatever.

It would not surprise me one bit, actually. They could hear waves breaking against shore and whatnot.

Harr harr. Nice one:-?.

I just said it, pal. I was pointing it out, no more.

Oh, and there is the fact that there will most likely be a lot of deck gun attacks, so:p...

Nothing burns my ass more than game developer geeks lecturing me on war morals while they make money simulating war games. Especially when they are hypocrites. In SH3, you can see men flying up in the air from explosions, their bodies flying through the air to certain death.

But they don't want to show men climbing into lifeboats.

Tell me that makes sense?:damn:

If they are so concerned about morals, perhaps by showing a little bit of the reality of the human cost of warfare, they might actually have a moral point that makes sense.

How about just lifeboats.....with people in......so the sub can surface and rescue them....and get extra renown for that.....and the kaleun gets the nobel peace price.....:yep:

Serious, lifeboats are a must. even the titanic had working lifeboats....(just enough for half the passengers...):down:

SHIV should consider this. I dont see an ethical problem in this, considering other games on the market. (Shoot-em-up and stuff like that, shotguns & chainsaws....):damn:

Everything that adds to the realism are welcome on my computer! :rotfl:

I really hate the ethical crap argument, men on deck and lifeboats are essential parts of the sim. If the abandon ship order is given then you know not to waste another topedo on a sinking ship as its going down.
The developers left out so much stuff in SH3 I dont think it was an ethical decision at all its just a excuse for thier lazyness and the publishers greed. How about they use some ethics in these areas instead.
Need I remind people that pixels are not alive at all and noone dies in a computer game ever?

EDIT:
Also a change in deck activity could be a visual indication that you have been spotted, these are essential things and I hope the developers put some effort in this time around, or it may be my last silenthunter purchase, I have ethics, morals and standards too.

also add my vote for AA guns that kill anything, seagulls the band ect..
killing the people on the dock should result in your dismissal/death..but a bit of target practise on a seagull shouldnt...as it is the aa gun feels like a BB gun with it only working on a few things it should even work on your boat causing damage and a reprimand.

Perhaps, but you might also want to spend a few minutes with this Forum's Rules of Use

JCC

I didn't want to open a huge can of worms here, Guys, but I do find it strange in SH111 that after all the realism building up to the attack, you are infact sinking a ghost ship with nobody on board. In SH1V, I think if the DEVs could find a way to add at least audio of some activity on board a ship which has just been hit, that would be an improvement. If there was a way to include some level of visual activity (if only just at long range) that would also be an improvement.

Developers also said that they don't want you to shoot lifeboats :-?

Well I say: it was war and things like that happened.

Today's games are full of killing people with many sophisticated devices, there are lots of historically based games where you kill people- so what's their point with ethics ?

Would that be a problem to implement lifeboats, and for example make renown fall when shooting them ? (according to historic reality- were kaleuns somehow punished by the Kriegsmarine for shooting survivors ?)

And also- in SH4 that wouldn't be a problem- as far as I know- US Navy and generally allied forces were more "humanitarian"- so loosing renown for shooting lifeboats would be a good solution...

Seeing as there's only one known case of a U-boat doing that during World War II... I can't answer your question.