SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Sinking ships in port

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=202)

- - Sinking ships in port (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=209715)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkCt (Post 2154796)

If you were given a photo ops mission in a well protected harbor, and you did your very best to get in there without being detected, after taking the pictures, would you torpedo any of the ships or just try to slip back out?

In real life you won't find any recon missions involving protected harbors. The events depicted in movies like Destination Tokyo just didn't happen. Given the locations involved it looks like recon missions were dedicated to checking the enemy's land forces, not his shipping.
http://www.valoratsea.com/recon.htm

For argument's sake, though, lets pretend they did. Why would you be sent into a heavily protected harbor to take pictures in the first place? Because the higher-ups wanted to know what was there. Why would they want to know what was there? Because with that information they could plan surface and air attacks that could devastate enemy forces, not just sinke a couple of ships. If, once you took your pictures, you proceded to sink ships you would alert the enemy to the fact that American forces had plans involving that harbor, thereby defeating the very purpose you were sent there for.

Quote:

Most of the harbors I did photo ops in just had a few patrol boats and freighters but one had a couple carriers, BB's and a sub. All the other times I would just take the photos and leave but that time the temptation was just too great.

Missions assigned by the game are total fiction. I used to do the same in SH1 until I figured that out. After that I refused to go on missions involving major naval bases, not because they were dangerous but because they never happened in real life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 2154918)

For argument's sake, though, lets pretend they did. Why would you be sent into a heavily protected harbor to take pictures in the first place? Because the higher-ups wanted to know what was there. Why would they want to know what was there? Because with that information they could plan surface and air attacks that could devastate enemy forces, not just sinke a couple of ships. If, once you took your pictures, you proceded to sink ships you would alert the enemy to the fact that American forces had plans involving that harbor, thereby defeating the very purpose you were sent there for.

You make a good point. A sub wouldn't be sent on such a hazardous mission, unless there was a very good reason; a desire for general information hardly qualifies.

It would be nice if the game were smart enough to come up with more authentic or rational special missions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 2154918)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorpX (Post 2155198)

It would be nice if the game were smart enough to come up with more authentic or rational special missions.

well I think its hard to judge because just like in RL you wouldn't have a clue why you were there or why you are taking pictures instead of sinking ships so the "unexplained" is perfectly realistic IMHO.

lets say they have info that ship "x" is going to meet up with force "y" or lets say the yamato, something that can have an affect on the war if following a ship like that rather then sinking it, can lead you to a more serious threat they have been looking for. to do this you may well need to be going to a major port with little chance of success if the need was great enough.

simplistic example maybe, but im sure many scenarios like that played out during the war.

so having no other info then go to point "x" and take pictures keeps the true goal secret in case you are captured and in truth you have no need to know anything about the "true" mission you are on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webster (Post 2155218)

lets say they have info that ship "x" is going to meet up with force "y" or lets say the yamato, something that can have an affect on the war if following a ship like that rather then sinking it, can lead you to a more serious threat they have been looking for. to do this you may well need to be going to a major port with little chance of success if the need was great enough.

The problem is I can't come up with a historical instance where a submarine's mission was to shadow a warship to see where it goes, or follow it into a port. A submarine is a poor platform for such a job since it won't be able to keep up with most warships, speed wise even on the surface. When I look at Steve's list of historical sub recon missions I mostly see beach recon missions. That likely means an Army or Marine liaison officer is aboard and since he can't steer the ship to want he wants to see he is going to have to confer what he wants to the sub's skipper. If he wants to get close enough to see the lay of the land, to photograph machine gun nests and anti-boat gun emplacements he will have to convey that information as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webster (Post 2155218)

True enough.

However, I was thinking that this:

...proceed to zone A2 and be on station no later than 1200 hrs. Jan. 15 .......then orders are received detailing that enemy ship movements are to be monitored from as close in to port as practicable, but avoid contact and under no circumstances are attacks to be made - report findings for operation sledgehammer [you wouldn't necessarily know much about the operation, or optionally would learn the details after returning to home port]........at a certain time you are cleared to attack enemy shipping after 1000 hrs., and to intercept any large enemy ships fleeing (bombing attack occurs. Some enemy ships attempt to get to safer port after attack, some have damage).

is more interesting than this:

Go on random mission to major enemy base and sneak past inexplicably weak defenses to photograph important enemy capitol ships. (Torpedo helpless anchored capitol ships at your discretion.)

Well, you get the idea.

I guess the bottom line is that a lot more could have been done with the concept of special missions. For example, they ignored mining operations entirely.

I have to agree with Webster. You have to play this game not knowing what you'll find in any port you go into. We're all looking at this because we know what happened in history. I've been playing RSRDC which is as close to history as this game allows. We are given a mission to photo ships in a port but we already know that it was not realistic so why do it? Because that's the game and the admirals somewhere in that game world told us to do it.
But being a game you can chose to play it any way you want. For me I want to follow orders as best that I can. So if I go into a harbor to to take pictures that's my mission BUT, while I'm in there I come upon a carrier, cruiser or other capital ships I would definitely take a shot at one.

Like others have said there's not much of a challenge sailing into an unprotected harbor and sinking ships that don't fight back.