That was never a bug. SCS did that deliberately as having them stick around would cause problems with the physics engine, you'd have to force them to stay on the bottom.

With all respect .. that is nonsense .. making them stay on the bottom ? This is software man .. it does what YOU want .. there is no 'hey bill, it still floats, how are we going to fix it ?'. Buildings does not move too .. so why dead ships would ?

Even if it is intended it was a bad decision.

I agree Dr Sid. In SC they stay on the bottom so why isn't it possible in DW? Also, I remember quite sometime ago, Jamie mentioned they were going to look into this, but obviously it has been overlooked or perhaps my memory is beginning to fail me and its not a bug. In deep water its not really an issue but in shallower water dead ships/subs can cause your torps or the enemys torps to aquire wrecks on the bottom which I have used on occassion to evade incoming torps.

Nemo

Is that really anything negative buoyancy can't handle? Maybe add a little friction with the bottom to hold it in place on not-so-steep slopes?

lol...but it's always been there!

Just a list for my recent weapons i am using, and the 2nd weapon is just the ASM missile, it looks like that underwater, when starting in the air it gets wings :)

it's just bull****.

it's good they added the function it's crap they didn't leave it at 100% as it was 1.03ed.

You can just detect the collision and from that moment fix the wreck position and let it fixed (as building) .. no more position update. Tetris does it .. while DW can't ? I too think this was just overlooked.

I don't know nothing about programming but I think that if it were so easy, it would have been done yet.

There should be another reason :hmm:

You can turn it up to 100% if you choose to. What's bull**** about having a choice?

The reason is that SCS does not want to develop DW anymore. Or not very much. It is company with hundreds of programmer (as I've heard in the video with Jamie). I say one programmer is working on DW now, and most probably not even fulltime.
While 1.04 has some new models (which already existed before it seems), it has just minor changes in code itself. It only confirms my theories.

Believe me .. I'm programmer for 20 years, I even made some 3d gaming stuff, I'm interested in simulation from programming point of view. Things like dead platforms should be fixed in hours, beta tested in week.

In DW there is many really obvious unexplainable shortcomings (let's not call them bugs). Like 16 bit graphics. And many many like this.
DW is nice game and I like it a lot. I'm thankfull for 1.04. But it is way under the standards. Especially patch reaction is worse than most freeware products.

Hell ! Compare 1.04 to what Luftwolf has done. And it is one man, not specialist, not fulltime, for free, with no official support. I say he made like 10 times more changes and fixes than all patches together. You can really see his work growing. With SCS you just wait .. wait .. wait .. ah .. the bug introduced in last patch is fixed .. cool.

I don't want to blame anybody .. SCS has full right to manage their people. DW is best sub game anyway.

I just can't understand these post like 'they did not include that because it's too complicated' .. only reason we don't have something is SCS does not want us to have it .. they just have other priorities, and it is OK all-around, just a little shame for us, sub nuts :|\\

Oh happy day! :sunny:

Hey now, let's be fair.

1.04 fixed a very serious pitch control problem that was having a profound effect on gameplay in 1.03. As the first patch after the European releases, it addressed several bugs and compatibility issues related to those releases. It fixed an error in the active sonar model and fixed glitches in AI aircraft sensors and behavior.

And it wasn't just damage control. We now have the options of whether torps explode on decoys or home on dead platforms. We have an enhanced torpedo range formula that accounts for the rate of fuel consumption and efficiency for different speed settings. The new eye candy isn't bad either.

That's a lot to be happy about in my book.

With this speed it would take like 10 years to make the whole game .. only thing I say is that SCS pays too few people to work on DW. Two more options in ini file, controlling variables which already had to be in the game .. talking about it and deciding if we want it takes more time that making it.

It's allright with me .. but look at the suggestion thread:

- Virginia please !
- We want nukes !
- missions free of bugs (ie tons of testing)
- improvement of framerates (most probably full simulation redesign)
- and many more funky features

These are simple beyond what we may expect. Even some minor things seems to be out of possibilites ..
- total rework of noise/speed curve
- array depth indicated in subs
- and more ..

And there is even many really minor tweaks, which does not require interface changes, which we don't have, like 32 bit screenmodes.

I don't blame anybody .. but DW is dead .. SCS just pretends it is not (maybe only Jamie pretends it by working on DW in his freetime, nice guy).

How about the fact that people don't buy DW ?
If the game were much more succesful we would see more patches, and in more timely maner.
In any case, as far as I'm concerned the game is as complete as it ever is going to be.
The only issues remaining are the 16 bit graphics, the absence of AA and AF and non detectability of masts.
We now have a very great mod in the workings (superior in my book to the SCX mod of SC) and a new graphical update.
Barring those minor issues (the first 3 of which cannot be resolved without basically rewriting the whole graphics engine) the game is great. :p :up:

Yeah .. I agree.

That's what I mean by saying that SCS has full right to do this. It's just ok.
Just don't call for big updates. It's not going to happen. Not from SCS, I mean.

I'm looking forward any mods :rock: