SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Japanese Ships Which Should be in SHIV

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)

- - Japanese Ships Which Should be in SHIV (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=91917)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wulfmann

US subs sank 4 fleet carriers and 4 escort carriers and one battleship (Kongo).
The U-Boats sank 3 fleet carriers and 3 escort carriers (but so badly damaged 2 more they were total losses so really 5) and 2 battleships (Royal Oak and Barham)

I do agree subs were more involved on both sides of the Pacific in surface ship battles and remember the German score was over a longer time period.

Note that both German battleship sinkings were when U-Boats were ordered away from shipping attacks with the intent on attacking warships as was the case for 2 of the 3 fleet carriers sunk.

Wulfmann

In case some missed this it seems to have answered all the later post. How does it not?

Wulfmann

Well, you left out the cruisers, but really I was trying to agree with you by quoting another source that I felt more or less concurs with you. Perhaps I worded it wrong.

@AG124:

Quote:

Brockman's performance on June 4, in terms of courage and persistence, was outstanding, and he received a Navy Cross. Credited with sinking Soryu, Brockman was later to be denied. In a careful postwar analysis, the U.S. Navy determined, after comparing position reports of Nautilus and the Japanese forces, that the carrier Brockman shot at was not Soryu but Kaga.

- p. 244 in the paperback edition if you're interested (or look up Kaga in the index).

THe ships that requre the most modeling resources are the ones that are not commonly seen, or will be seen at distances where the quality of the model is less important.

Warships WILL and should be more imporant in SH4 but I would rather see modeling resources placed more on the commonly seen ships (greater variety of smaller vessels), and also on things like coastal modeling, buildings, and sub interiors.

As someone said though, if they they create an opensource toolkit for ship modeling then the modders could take on this project (and they would of course).

And somewhere in the game code we would need the ability to replace existing (stock) warship types with a greater varierty off modded ones that are perhaps selected by the campaign engine on a random basis.

So basically, the stock game could come with one battleship class and the individual ships would be replaced by a randomly selected modded one.
Trout

Im not worried about Japanese ships that the devs include as Im sure they will model all the important ones.

AI submarines and aircraft is what i would worry about.

Look at SH3, No AI subs at all - discraceful! Where are all the fantastic british S and T class subs?
They better have AI submarines this time round, I really want the chance to see and I-400 in my scope, lack of Ai subs In SHIV is a bit of a deal breaker for me. (when i say AI subs, I dont mean wolf packs)

And what of aircraft?
Ugly super low detailed models, very basic AI,
lack of variety in ordinance (where are the torpedos, rockets and cannons?)
And some incorrect aircraft types included! In SH3 we have the Hurricane and P38 lightning attacking Uboats :down: , whilst the most common ASW aircraft like the beaufighter, Hudson and mosquito were missing! This shows poor reserch, even SH2 did a better job in this department.

These are the things the devs are more lightly to fudge, so i would make a thread about AI Aircraft and subs to be included not ships.

Special aircraft such as transports should be included as well, I think.

And an abundance of fishing boats and the like around harbours.