So what was so bad about Destroyer Command ?
 

Are there enough people around to give a reasonably representative sample of views ? :-?

Just to refresh :-

It was given right slagging by Gamespot
I believe sales figures were very poor.
It always attracted a high moan count from the forums.

I've never had a problems with it personally. The only thing I can remember is that there were problems with the MP aspect of it, but that was right after it first came out and everyone was still trying to figure it out.

I recall one of the biggest complaints was in order for it to be compatiable with SH2 it delayed the release of SH2. :lol:

True, but that was before release. I believe this was eventually sorted out. The Wolfpack/Eagle leagues seem to have successfully linked the two games for years now ... and didn't PM add some more stability ? I've never tried them online but was always happy with their performance over a LAN.

Quote Glowwormguy from another thread ( my emphasis)

Quote:

Yeah, better graphics would be nice, though quite frankly I'd be happy seeing such things as crew quality and training, proper smoke (and making smoke) and gunnery (including BVR gunnery) and a better, branching campaign with the possibility for random convoy actions and historic battles like they had in the old Aces of Dynamix

Personally I enjoyed it. While I hated SHII for not having a dynamic campaign, I thought the scripted flavor fit right in with DC, as destroyers have to do what they're told and never get sent out alone to "mess with the enemy".

I thought it was well done, and since I tend to run many careers side-by-side, once SH4 is out I intend to spend all my time going through the war playing both sides, both newer sub games and Destroyer Command (plus a couple of flight sims as well).

I saw no real problems with the game. I even find it very easy to set up campaigns and write misions for it. I feel it was a well thought out game, as well to it linking with SHII.:up:

@HS
If you would not write here in white letters, all could read your comment. :D

There are still other forum styles than SmartDark and those have a white background in the text area:yep:

:()1:

:rotfl:

I'm afraid, life tends to be a bit complicated from time to time ... :D

Probably the biggest problem for DC was that the surface simmers are not as many as the subsurface ones. Good examples of that are the relatively small communities of players from GNB or Fighting Steel. Anyway, for a destroyer game DC had in my opinion some serious flaws that could be corrected only to a certain extent:

-In ASW: Stupid sub AI, and too good Destroyer sensors & Depth charges

-In Surface action: Stupid AI in the enemy and limited rendering of ships to 14000 yards

My two cents

SHIII has been, literally, a dream come true to me. It's virtually exactly the game I've always wanted to play (and is about the only pc/video/etc. game I own and play).

However, after having played it for quite some time now I've gotten curious as to what it would be like with the shoe on the other foot; i.e. being a destroyer.

Is Destroyer Command worth it? I enjoy immersion/realism rather then snazzy graphics (although, hey, I'll take snazzy graphics too :yep: ) which is why I like SHIII as much as I do (and why I'd pay without blinking $200 for it, if that's what it took . . . and had it been fully developed before release). Will I be disappointed with Destroyer Command?

I assume if my pc/system is capable of running SHIII it will run DC without problems. I'm not gonna get a rude surprise with that assumption, will I?

And lastly, is it possible to MP with others, especially those running SHII and, if so, how easy is it to partner up with others?

T'anks!

This is where you find the guys who play online . The Wolfpack League is for those who want to be sub commanders and the Eagle League is for those who want to command Destroyers. There are more sub commanders than Destroyer commanders.

http://www.subclub.info/phpBB_subclu...a45c32b76b259d

Recommending a sim is always a bit of a gamble because it is so subjective. DC is not as graphically rich as SH3 but you say this is not an issue with you. The graphics however are IMHO on the right side of the good/bad divide. DC certainly gives you an experience you can never get with SH3 so on that basis you should find it interesting, particularly if you go online. In single play mode you may get quickly bored by how bad the AI is. Anyway, these days you should be able to pick up Destroyer Command for buttons so you are not really risking much. Like all these games they are much improved if you can install a lot of the mods. Unfortunately most of the DC mods are not now so easy to find. If you are really intersested I can point you to where they are on a step by step basis.

Thanks so much for the quick reply, and for your advice and opinion. I really appreciate it!:up:

Hi guys,

Yeah like Horsa errr I said earlier :lol: but personally graphics takes second place to a good solid gaming experience. The inability for a dynamic or even a branching 'decision tree' campaign such as they apparently have in Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator 2 (another game I modded before) was pretty unfortunate but when you're talking destroyers I mean there are certain 'touches' that would have been simple enough I think to impliment if they thought of it as much as they did the graphics.

Crew Quality - virtually every game has some sort of 'experience' rating and it adds to the game to have to PRESERVE your men so they can gain experience. A new ship/recommissioned ship would have a green crew that you'd have to 'work up' Added to this would be...

Alert Status - I mean we have the General Quarters/Klaxxon button but it does SQUAT. It would have been pretty easy I think to simply link alert status to crew quality so that you have to keep the crew on low alert (or you'll tire them out/demoralize them) most of the time but of course this means they react pretty slowly to enemy threats - ammo will be in the lockers, etc. High alert means cleared for action but you can only keep them 'on edge' for so long before fatigue and morale will cause performance to suffer drastically (law of diminishing returns).
Of course, a high quality crew would outperform a low quality one for a longer time...

Mission variety - destroyers are the workhorses of the fleet performing a large variety of missions, not just sub hunts and fleet actions. Search and rescue, landing small naval parties on raids/espionage, convoy escorting, sub hunting, minelaying, hunting for enemy small craft, reconnaissance, fleet escort, etc. Heck old GATO on my Atari had 'rescuing downed fliers' missions! And this should have gone for SH2 as well - landing raiders/coastwatchers/agents and picking up downed fliers or sinking survivors.

It may be a cosmetic issue in this game but whenever you read about DDs or watch movies, they're all MAKING SMOKE. This would block visual gunnery - good for screening purposes, but use up fuel reserves.

Anyways that's really it for my rant/wishlist.

cheers,
Mountbatten

Looks like a nice site. I'd love to join . . . however, as I've been waiting days to be approved, it appears they aren't at all interested in new members.

Pity.

Such a shame. :cry: Maybe they are going through a quiet phase.

Perhaps you could try posting or even emailing one of them.

When I 'subscribed' I got an email saying (in brief) welcome, and to expect an approval email soon.

When a week or so had elapsed I replied to that email, asking when I'd be approved.

I got a reply within a day, stating: Not to sound critical, but that wasn't terribly helpful. I don't know who Onkel Neal is, and as that's not his username, well . . .

So I've no actual contact info for anyone, and if I have to play detective and beg to join, I'd rather just shrug and move on.

Thank you for your help and advice.

'Onkel Neal' is Neal Stevens, the founder and owner of Subsim. The e-mail adress provided will put you in direct contact with him.

As I recall, when I first joined over at SubClub it took a long time to actually get in; weeks, in fact.