The Silent Hunter series is about World War II subs. Better to give it a new name and attach a "From the makers of the Silent Hunter™ series"-sticker to the game packaging if they are to make it non-World War II.

I wouldn't be too opposed to a Cold War sim, but I'd much, much rather have a World War I or II submarine simulator again.

I'm really sick of those "fire and forget" stereotypes. I could say that you just point and click in WWII sims, especially with those damn magnetic torpedoes.

SH5 will require you to have the space for them to build a life-size submarine, which will be crewed entirely by robots (who can speak in german or english, whichever you like), and which will simulate all stations accurately. It will move on gimbals and shake, giving you the experience of really diving and really being attacked. If you die, explosives placed at strategic places throughout the sub will explode, providing an accurate simulation of death and preventing constant whining about a pathetic "death screen."

:o


:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

For thoese who want to dead is dead, this will be the sim for you! If this is the case, the market for SHVI is going to be seriously depleated by the time the game is relased!

I have to agree with Nightmare and Steeltrap. Nuclear submarines are just boring to simulate because the whole submarine tactics are sterile and indirect. I´ve "played" "Fast Attack", 688i and the latest version which they sell as a full-prize game although it´s nothing more than a modded version using the same old graphics. If people like gazing at waterfall displays, let them play 688I Hunter-Killer. No need to have waterfall-displays using 3.0 shaders and dual core CPUs. If you ask me, SH5 should be about the Atlantic theatre again. Reasons? - the Atlantic offers the widest range of variety, technological development and historical scenerios - the Atlantic U.Boat war was the toughest, most challenging and most excessive submarine war ever - it was also the most famous (and infamous) one - SH3 may be considered the best WW2 subsim ever - but why? Is it because it is so great or is it because there aren´t any alternatives??? Consider the work all those modders have put into it so far and you´ll agree that much could have done better. Cheers, AS

But i think, a more important decision drive to Atlantic,
SH4..........>65TH of Pearl harbour
SH5..........> German nazi fashon always on stage

SHV, a WWI sub sim, or a WWII IJN sub sim.

I like modern submarine simulations.

Anyway, as I said in a much, much earlier thread, I think that SHV should be a test ordnance retrieval trawler simulation, SHVI should feature the Turtle, and SHXXVII should be set in the future world of 3054. I look forward to zipping about the ocean at a depth of 7000 feet doing mach 3.

Once again, let's get SHIV first.

Indeed you could. A few points:

1. I prefaced my comments with the rider that they were "The big problems with 'modern' subsims for me". I ended my comments with "(that's just my opinion - I might be totally mistaken)".

2. I'd find it interesting to hear how you would say a WWII sim using totally manual fore control is as much a 'point and click' as a modern one. Note I've said "I'd find it interesting" and mean exactly that - while it's not apparent to me that this is the case, perhaps you could give some reasons and comparisons to show why you believe that to be so.

3. Not sure how a magnetic torp makes WWII sim comparable with modern ones. After all, you can't wire guide a WWII torp, nor do they have programmable active search functions. Again, perhaps I have missed some significant aspects of the modern sim.

4. Modern subs don't need to surface, unless we're talking modern diesel-electric. In either case, they have powerful active and passive systems for locating and firing upon targets. The periscope is comparitively redundant.

5. I'm always happy to hear differing views. Unfortunately you've not shared yours, and I for one would like to hear more.

6. This is NOT a flame or criticism. I hope you won't see it as such. I am simply asking to hear about those aspects of a modern sim that make it as potentially interesting in its challenges as a WWII one.

Cheers

Hi Steeltrap

Even though I'm not JordanC, I'd like to point out some aspects of modern sub sims that you might have missed. Just like you, I'm just telling my opinion and this is in no way meant to be flame or anything like that.

The biggest misconception that you (and some other people as well) seem to have is, that modern subs are just fire-and-forget platforms. While it is true that they have powerful sensors that can detect targets from miles away and while it is true that modern torpedoes have active searching system, the firing solution is still made by the player.
The ocean is vast and targets are usually small, often other submarines. Most torpedoes in Dangerous Waters (the only modern sub sim that I have played) have range of about 10 nautical miles. The target might be much further away. Then again, he can be much closer too and your torpedo may overshoot. You could of course set the torpedo to search for the target at once, but then your torpedo will zig-zag, therefore slowing down a bit and giving your opponent more time to evade. Or even better, it could lock on a civilian oil tanker and blow it up instead of the intended target. Usually there is much more traffic in the mission than just player's sub and his target.
Things get bit easier when hunting surface targets (a carrier, for example), because they make more noise. The downside is, that they are usually heavily protected. Therefore your could launch a torpedo, but if you don't know exactly where the carrier is, your torpedo can once again lock on a wrong target. Usually you don't get a second chance either: when you launch a torpedo, everyone with a half brain can see the bearing where it's coming from. You don't usually get many new friends that way, but lots of attention is assured.

I think the "fire-and-forget" stereotype is born when people try to put a modern submarine to do WWII submarine's job. If you have active searching torpedoes and anti ship missiles, of course slaughtering merchants is easier than with steam powered torpedoes of early Silent Hunter 3. But in SH3 you still have to avoid sinking neutral merchants in the convoy. The same is true with modern subs. You can't just fire and forget.
Also, in the modern sub, launching torpedoes is more of a precision work. Imagine that you find a convoy totally consisting of enemy ships. In Silent Hunter you would freely choose and try to sink the biggest targets, in Dangerous waters your mission might be to sink that simple coastal merchant in the middle of the convoy without harming any others.
I'm not trying to oversimplify WWII sims by any means. I'm just trying to point out, that you can't just shoot blindly neither in Silent Hunter nor in Dangerous Waters.

Sometimes I have difficulties understanding the comparison of modern and WWII era sims (not pointing anyone with fingers here, just a general statement.)
I play both, I enjoy both and in both I find different challenges. In Silent Hunter there is a thrill of hunting: from a weak sound contact to finally seeing your unaware target trough the periscope, plotting his course and speed, intercepting and finally sinking him.
In Dangerous Waters it's the thrill of hide-and-seek game. My towed array picks up a faint contact that I can't identify. Could it be the sub I've been looking for, or is it yet another fishing boat? If it is a sub, has he heard me yet, or can I go closer? How much information I need to make a good firing solution? How long can I plot it without fear that he is currently trying to do the same?
Or, in a different scenario, I pick up sound contact of enemy task force loud and clear. Which of those contacts if the ship I'm supposed to sink? What kind of escorts do they have? Are they close enough for me to launch a salvo? What about their aircover or possible submarine escorts?

Finally I'd suggest that you would try Dangerous Waters out, if you you haven't already and get a chance to do so. The full version gives much wider picture of the sim, though the demo is also pretty good if I remember correctly. There should also be a multiplayer demo, so if you'd like to try it out, I'd be happy to sink some tonnage with you and so would surely be many people over at Subsim's Dangerous Waters forum. I also hope that, if they ever read this thread, they will give a bit better explanation instead of this poorly written rambling of mine.

Just my humble opinions.

Re:
 

Why do you need modern submarine sim? All need data is closed. All modern sub sim is american saw position. All real information about technical data as US as USSR unknow in full size. Data about navy weaps after 1945 is really. But technical systems sub and undersea vessels unknow in full size.
So, if it would be moder sim reales was unrealistic only.
I think, that SH V can be about jap or british or italian subs, so about russian subs addon is in work.

I think the next one out if there is one will be the destroyer command. Perhaps titled "Loud Hunter I"

dc dc dc dc dc dc
dc dc dc dc dc dc
dc dc
dc dc
dc dc
dc dc
dc dc dc dc dc dc
dc dc dc dc dc dc

But D bho!? lost....hehehehehe

"SHV- Unrestricted Warfare"

Combined together all the features of ShIII and IV, plus the addition of dynamic campains as Dutch, British, Japanese, Italian, French, with accurately modeled submarines to match.

Campaigns should be FULLY dynamic and strategic i.e. when you sink a ship, it should take XXX number of days to have a new one rebuilt. I guess that would take a honka-better ai, but.....

Better I just shut up....nap time soon.

In all seriousness, I think before Silent Hunter 5 we should get an add-on pack for SIlent Hunter 4. The add-on should contain a Japanese campaign, and add the S-Class subs the the US roster of playable subs. I was disappointed to find they wouldn't be in SH4. I love those little guys!

I agree with Patboot that the fifth installation should add campaigns by subs of other nations, particularly the British (in the Med and Indian ocean) and Italians, but also the French, Dutch, and the Russians (Perhaps not an exciting campaign, but I want their subs!!!). I'd also like a "fantasy" campaign mode where you can choose the country campaign you wish to play, but would allow all subs from all countries and eras for you to command.

Re: Possible future SHV???
 

SH-V Pro...U-boots again I hope.When I say pro I mean like that tank sim SB pro.
The markets there...MMO would be great! If they would just approach this like Falcon 3.0 I would be a very happy guy and I would pay what ever the cost.:yep:

OK,I really dont know how many of you would like a SH based on the cold war,it seems that the WW2 scenario calls much more attention.
So,I would like that ALL would make a call to people and developers from Ubi,to make possible the adition of interesting expansions for SH4,just the way it happens with IL2,that means,more playable and controlable ships,more sceneries,more details.......

Lets make it possible with your help.

Thanks to all.

Hottentot

Thanks very much for your reply. It was exactly what I was after, as it was clear to me there must be factors I was overlooking given people on here do enjoy the modern sims.

I actually had Red Storm Rising on my Amiga 2000 (boy, that's going back a bit!!) and I did enjoy it, and I do remember exactly the sorts of challenges you're describing.

I guess the real point to me is that the advent of vastly superior technologies compared with WWII forever changed the way subs worked. Nothing wrong with that, and you have presented very well the challenges faced in that genre. My main point is that several major changes diminish the enjoyment of things for me, and as a recap they are:
- lack of relying on crew alertness in something as basic as spotting a ship or aircraft. Sensors (and USA's subs with air-search radar were an early example) mean you will 'spot' potential threats to you usually well before they are in fact an actual threat.
- no need to travel on surface, which makes a vast difference.
- absence of any real-life scenario to be simulated i.e. it's all 'what if', not 'this is an approximation of what that was like for thise who lived it'.

I simplified things by saying they're 'point and shoot' in a modern sim, although I did qualify that by saying this was the case in comparison with coping with weather and visibility etc on a WWII sub.

Anyway, thanks for your post. Appreciate you taking the time to spell out those things you enjoy. I guess they are really the same challenges as faced in WWII, it's just that the technology and strategic situations make them different in their presentation. The root causes, as it were, remain the same.

Cheers

Just wondering...

There is things in SHIII which could be done better...
There will be things in SHIV which could be done better...
So...
Why to change to a modern sub...?


-RC-

@ Rosencrantz: Personally think submarine simulations should cover all eras of history. It has just been released a WWI sub-sim (called 1914..something..dont remember), and then we have SHIII (WWII Atlantic), and SHIV (Pacific). I also think that the world is running dry on submarine-wars to make games out of (or vice versa). Of course SHIII / SHIV could and can be done better, but we dont want the modders to be unemployed,do we.....:up: