I'm sure your right but , with the new engine and graphics it might fly this time hooked up th Silent Hunter.

Not as a standalone.

SF never screwed with my machine either...knock on wood. Others though have had nightmares. I think those with Sony DVD in their machine. Not sure. I never paid much attention because SF did nothing adverse to my machine.

Ditto...agreed http://www.psionguild.org/forums/ima...s/thumbsup.gif

Now that would be neat! I would like to take the Compass Rose in the Atlantic and hang on for dear life:o

I'd have thought this would of been your favourite.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/1...gdutchman1.jpg

That damn thing. She makes prop noises. I follower her for a day until I notice what she was. :shifty:

LMAO....I remember dropping my can contents over the keyboard when I found out the bloody cannons fired :DL

Yeah, I share that hope. But for a successful stand-alone destroyer title, I don't think better graphics and new engine are the key, not sure what is. In Nov 2001 Silent Hunter II was released, and in Feb 2002, Destroyer Command followed. They had similar (if not the same) graphics and engines, yet SH2 sold 100,000 copies to DC's 45,000. I don't think people are that romantically enamored with DDs as they are with undersea boats.

I don't know why there was any reason to make two separate games connect online...the simplest option would be to add a few playable Brit destroyers in SH5, and it's all in the same game. Instant MP success. I mean, for the most part, what are the differences between one class sub and another in the game? Different attributes--speed, depth, durability, and other characteristics written on a unit file; different frame and skin, and some different interface and sounds, perhaps. So, make sub with a DD frame and skin, add the necessary interfaces, and make sure the unit file won't allow it to change depths without the help of a torpedo in the boilerroom :)

I played DC, I'm a bit hazy on this, so I may be well off the mark. I think it was a flawed concept, it was too small and it was all canned, so when you started a mission you knew there was a sub going to appear along the way, or what was the point of the mission right? Also, the graphics weren't up to the job. I remember the first time I saw the periscope of an enemy sub. It couldn't have been more obvious. A thick black line on a solidish background. It really stuck out. I seem to recall it only being ASW destroyers, there was no aircraft attacking? Maybe there was but not limited.

Well, all that may have been completely wrong, so I apologise if it was.

What would make a great modern DC, is to have it as a convoy controller. You play whichever country and your job is to get the shipping to it's destination and get it safely returned. Now, that sounds a bit dull. But, if you think of it like Total Air War, when you take a strategic overview, but can jump in to any ship at any time, then you have a situation, where you can play a strategy route the convoys away from the subs and direct ASW assets to the subs, or you could jump in and prosecute the attack. The main advatage of this is that as it would be such a large area, you would get contacts and would have to spend time deciding if the contact report was genuine, either based on a gut feeling or actually going down and doing a sweep yourself, or if it was a real attack or not. Given that you would always be needed elsewhere with the amount of traffic and reports, you may do a sweep, decide there is nothing, but actually there is and you start losing ships in that convoy.

You could be in charge of routing ASW air patrols over shipping lanes or ASW convoys if your country has them available. Imagine playing Japan and having your operating area continually shrinking and thinks getting more and more hectic. Order convoy formation changes and zig zag patterns, managing speed against torpedo attack.

To do it properly, you could even direct your countries maritime air patrols to look for enemy shipping and direct subs to their locations, and when you found one, set it up on the strategy map in a good position, if possible and jump in and take over that sub. Why play one sub or one destroyer when you can play them all muahahahah!

That would give you two markets and lots of action and lots of replayability, with no repitition. That's just the single player version too.

Interesting concept Neal:hmmm: I could see that in MP action. It would be fun to play cat and mouse with a few ash cans for good measure.

@ Nisgeis I can plausibly see myself playing a campaign being a destroyer in the Atlantic and not find it dull. The player would have to have an interface that allows that player to direct the other escorts in the group. Sure, there might be a spell were there are no subs looking to sink your appointed vessels but while in the sub you run into a dry spell with no vessels to sink. It is very similar in nature. Imagine a wolfpack along the way! If done right with a great graphics engine I think a large following could be possible and throw in MP action for both subs and DD.

I agree completely. I dabbled with the idea of making escorts work for SH4 but there were just too many hurdles to leap over. And I'm not as agile as I used to be. But if SH5 had better surface ship systems modability--I'd give it some serious effort. After all--what could be more fun than sinking some of you guys personally :rock:!

:arrgh!:

@Nisgeis Why stop there? Why not add the ability to jump into an aircraft, in either an ASW or anti-shipping role?

This isn't really about SH5, but I think there could be a lot of potential in using the gameplay platform in the SH series for an Age of Fighting Sail simulation. You could start as a commander of any navy in command of a smaller vessel, say a brig or sloop-of-war, and advance through the ranks to eventually command a fleet as an admiral (with several ships of the line!). I love the SH series and WWII, but my area of expertise is the Napoleonic Wars and the naval warfare of the period. For anyone who knows anything about this... can you imagine commanding the Victory at Trafalgar?! It would be so amazing!
Most would think a sailing game would go really slowly... some thing SH plays slow already. I say that if Ubisoft made the player manage the ship with enough detail it would actually keep the player busy and make battles epic. Anyone who has played Akella's Pirates of the Caribbean knows what a sailing sim is like... but imagine one that requires true tall-ship management... I'm talking having to drop the lead to figure the depth beneath the keel and actually raising signals to communicate and give orders to your squadron when you eventually get one.

Any comments on this?

I thought we were supposed to be getting some info after Hawks release. Isn't Hawk out already? :ping:

Something pretty similar has recently been released, Empire: Total War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_total_war