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.

Wasnt that machine gunning survivors in the water with hand held weaponds ?
Im sure an AA gunner shooting deck cargo to cause fire/damage is not going to avoid his target due to a sailor standing in the way.
It was war, and they bombed the civilians in the citys plenty didnt they...the bomber core wasnt shuned and hated for it, they are still concidered heros for thier sacrifices.

Im sure more machine gunning of survivors happened, just never reported, there was a certain level of hatred between nationalities at the time...

and John what are you saying ? you have a problem with the word crap ? or is it my comment regarding the devopers ?...
If crap is against the rules shouldnt the profanity filter mask it ?

EDIT:
also think of a troop ship being topedoed, if the soldiers man lifeboats then shooting them would still be part of the war effort, if they are rescued they would be redeployed.

That's for sure. My grandfather survived the sinking of the minelayer he was serving on, and the subsequent gunning down of the survivors in the water by Allied forces. But hey, war is war.

What should happen, especially in SHIII is that starshells get shot up from all ships in the convoy, not just ineffective spot lights waggling around.

Sounds cool,mate,but what about FPS when 20-or-something ships fires a bunch of flares?:hmm:

[/quote]

Case in point the USS Wahoo on her third war patrol under Capt. Mush Morton.

From Wahoo (By Richard O'Kane):

"'Secure from battle stations and prepare to surface' Five minutes later at 1310, three blasts sent Wahoo up to a quiet , empty sea. ...then one main engine went on propulsion to take us back to the scene of the trasport's sinking. ...When about 3 miles off, we could see a minimum of twenty boats loaded with Japanese troops, the craft ranging in size from scows to a small cabin cruiser. In a serious, considered tone, the captain ordered, 'Battle stations. Man both guns.' Morton must have seen my questioning expression, for 'Dick', he said, 'the army bombards strategic areas, and the air corps uses area-bombing so the ground forces can advance. Both bring civilian casualties. Now without other casualties, I will prevent these soldiers from getting ashore, for every one who does can mean an American life'. Some Japenese troops were undoubtedly hit during this action, but no individual was deliberately shot in the boats or in the sea. The boats were nothing more than flotsam by the time our submarine had completed a broad half circle and Moton ordered, 'Cease fire'.

It happened and I doubt that the Wahoo was the only sub with a tale like this. We had at times to do what was needed, however I do not believe we deliberately used life boats and their passengers as targets practice. I believe the Battan death march showed what the enemy did without deliberation, but I can not believe we did.

Bottom line - it (ability to fire on life boats) should be an avaliable choice. It is up to the Captain to make that call. If it was really called for can be a decission that Pearl can make and then maybe dictate "punishment" to the Captain.

Happy Hunting :ping:

How about hearing realistic noises on the ship after the hit, but only seeing debris in the water rather than bodies? By no means perfect, but at least it would be better than no audio or visual reference to the event.

True. Unless you were attacking a lone ship or some small transports/frieghters that were along the coast - who had no escorts, I think it was a rare occasion when a skipper would surface his boat to take a look at the debris or see if there were bodies floating around. I'd be making sure I was either setting up for my next target or what evasive action I was going to take to get away from the escorts!

We need to hear noises of the explosions on those ships hit - with working torps - as realistic as the devs can do. I mean by that - if I am submerged I should hear only that which my sonar could hear or what I possiably could hear 'through my hull'. If I am on the surface then make it what possiably could now be heard. Same for what was seen either submerged or on the surface. This would be better than no audio or visual reference, but also would be as close to real as could be done.

Some have mentioned all the shoot up/kill people games out on the market. If that is what one wants to do and see than those are the games one needs to purchase and play. This is a sim - keep it as real as can be made and from the point of the subs ability to see, hear, and do. I for one - if something needed to be left out - could do without the 'birds eye' views and underwater scenes in SH2 and 3. If I could not see or hear it from my bridge, lookout stands, scopes, or hear it from my sonar or 'through my hull' then I should not have that ability in the sim. Leave that space for what is required for game play and internal/external graphics etc.

Happy Hunting :ping:

I think it's possible for the DEVs to create a happy medium between a ghost ship and a shoot em up. I hope so anyway.