Perhaps we shouldn't bash a country because of a game? After all, we all have our fair share of problems (*cough* Labour *cough*).

All I was trying to emphasize is that while in Romania is not very easy to survive (to "survive", not to "live"), the SH5 devs earn a lot of money compared to some teacher, to some medic, to some engineer ... from the same country. That's OK, but at least, make a good game, damn it! To earn the money that UBI is giving you. The same money WE are giving to UBI. Otherwise, you can lower your life standards and try to live on your welfare. It would be more honest than BS-ing us with your pseudo arcade shooter RPG wannabe mutant Beta state game.

Anyone accusing others of racism should take a ride through some of the eastern european countries (I did last summer), they are definitely less civilized than say Canada and Australia. But thats only my subjective perspective, Im sure that they consider themselves just as happy as anyone else.

I think, blaming the Devs it totally unfair. With SHIII they have shown that they are more than capable of producing an excellent game.
I see the dark shadow of Ubi kommisars telling the Devs how to do things.

Just wondering...

Why are you wasting your time reading and posting about this pseudo arcade shooter RPG wannabe mutant Beta state game. :06::06::06:

----

Edit:

bah... don't need to reply, I know the aswser.

It's simple, because it's a great disappointment regarding something I've expected to be done right, as a submarine simulator. And the way the ones who like the pseudo arcade shooter RPG wannabe mutant Beta state game are keep saying that, the same way I will say I don't. It's just the freedom of saying your opinion about a product you've bought any time you want.

Sorry, I've already replied, I forgot about your crystal ball that helps you know the answer to your question in the moment you've raised that question.

I kind of like the "dynamic campaign." I agree the tonnage limits are ridiculous (I use LC mod).

What I don't agree with is how is this a step back from SHIII and SHIV?


SHIII Go To X Grid and patrol for X hours.

SHIV Repeat trips to photo a cruiser in Tokyo harbour. Or the awful airmen rescue missions.

It's true the feeling to pass on a target because it's out of one's patrol area is unnerving. But I don't see it as any different than SHIII's go to X, then go wherever, sink whatever, we don't care.

That being said I think Capital ships are WAY too common in SHV. Considering I played SHIII for 4 years, I don't even know how many patrols, I only came within attack range of a task force twice. Only once was I even able to set up a somewhat decent attack. Although "realistic" it made the effort to model and include these capital ships rather pointless.

In SHIV they weren't common, but certainly were not rare. I recall several patrols where I'd pick off 2-3 capital ships each.

In SHV I've played 4 patrols, sunk 4 cruisers, 3 battleships and 2 carriers (And I'm not going into harbours). I see more task forces than convoys (two so far). Hell I'm passing up capital ships so I can meet my objectives.

The thing I miss with the dynamic campaign is how it was done in Aces of the Deep: patrol a particular grid square for a while, and then one would receive orders from BdU to move to another grid square. None of this "no new objective, patrol another area of your choice" nonsense that we now have. Dönitz kept a tight reign on his boats and he (heck, the same with the USN) wouldn't let them just wander off and patrol wherever the heck they pleased.

Compelling orders and radio traffic: it's sadly lacking from SH5.

Should be able to add it pretty easily though, right? Events + scripting = teh win!

Aircraft carriers were used on WW2 against Germany?? If I'm not wrong they were mainly used on Pacific war.

We really shouldn't blame the devs for this because most of the guilt belongs to Ubisoft. It's Ubisoft's fault that they made the game more arcade (commercial; because every 10 year old kid wants a WW2 german submarine simulator for his birthday or under the Christmas tree instead of evil, un-christian games like shooters, action-adventure games etc. it's not like anybody enjoys shooters right?). The devs actually had a very tight and strict deadline, because like any major international company, Ubi doesn't really care about anything other than profit (who cares if the game is bought by a subsim fan or a casual gamer as long as "we get teh monee!1") and it's just not that easy to create a game in a small period of time.There's also the fact that the devs didn't really had full liberty of making the game, lots of "instructions" were being sent from the central Ubi headquarters even though those people had no idea what a submarine is(but that's just how everything goes).The devs of course have their share of guilt for various game malfunctions and lack of quality in the game but then again nothing's perfect (and some people just fail at doing their job).

PS: Oh and, I don't think that the u-boat orders back in those days sounded like "go to this area, patrol around and sink 50k tons worth of ships and 5 destroyers 3 battleships 1 carrier, because even though we don't know where the enemy is, we just know that by some strange miracle, a british task force will just happen to be passing by". Some dynamic campaign this is. Really Ubi ?!

From u-boat.net

http://www.uboat.net/allies/warships...s_glorious.jpg
The Courageous class aircraft carrier HMS Glorious. She was lost on 8 Jun 1940.

You may be interested in this:

It was Swordfish torpedo planes from HMS Ark Royal that brought Bismarck to heel and let the British battleships do their thing.

The longest hit recorded by naval gunfire was over 26,000 yards, made by KMS Scharnhorst against the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious.

While British captain Frederick John Walker created the hunter/killer group, once the United States got into the game these groups always had an 'escort carrier' with them.

The destroyer I served on, USS Brinkley Bass, was named for Harry Brinkley Bass, a navy F6F Hellcat pilot who was shot down by AA fire over southern France while flying off USS Kasaan Bay in 1944. Lots of carriers in the Atlantic and Med.

It's pretty much a tie (within a few hundred yards at most) between Scharnhorst and HMS Warspite....