Considering....
 

Hey, all. I'm usually just a Silent Hunter III Man, and I kind of want a bit of a diversion until SHIV is fully ironed out but I've been considering purchasing Dangerous Waters, Sub Command, and Janes Modern Sub Sim (The name escapes me as of now) But, I'm a bit hesitant because I've heard they are a tad more complicated than my usual routine. Should I consider buying or not? I need your help with my choice here! Thanks a million!

-Radtgaeb

Jane's 688I.

Whether this genre is for you will depend on what you want out of a sim. The SH series will provide a prettier and more emersive environment, and better campaigns, than 688I/SC/DW. But the modern subsims invovle better technical models of the sensors, weapons, and environment, as well as an intense head to head MP setup. Also, DW et. al. go more into the specific systems of the platforms, allowing (requiring, if you care about results) you to get your hands dirty, while the SH series is more about command. IMO, DW et. al are better simulations, but aren't as good as making you forget it's just a simulation. :cool:

I've got to agree with Molon Labe. It really depends on your preferences. I myself like to experience sub sims from both the historical WW2 perspective, and yet crave the modern nuke sub sim. Best of both worlds here. I enjoyed SH3 with GWX, and am currently enjoying SH4 tremendously. SH3 has been put away for a long time now, and SH4 will see retirement as well at some point in the future for sure. DW has been on my computer from the day it was released and has never left it. I can't ever see me take Dangerous Waters off my machine. DW for me is the cream of the crop in naval sims. But then again, that's just me.

I dl'd the demo, and I'm very intimidated by the vast controls (eep) and for some reason, I have a really high-pitched squeal in my pc unit :nope:....

Erm, check this out, it might help.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=106494

Well, it is a sim. The more complicated and less abstract it is, the better the quality of the simulated systems and environment. That being said, if you're willing to do your homework (i.e., RTFM), then it's manageable. It probably took me about a week to learn 688I back in college. Falcon 4AF took me two. Considering F4 has a bigger following than the modern subsims, I don't think the "studying" required is prohibitive.

You also have the option to use autocrew to alleviate some of the burden; just understand that some autocrew is generally ineffective (fire control comes to mind) and that others are just a stopgap measure and perform poorly compared to a human (sonar).

I have a question. How is the steam version of DW. Ive lost my CD along with Fleet command long ago. But was thinking of buying it off steam for only 19.95$

But can you mod the steam version? or are you locked to vanilla game.

To the OP i have to agree that the janes sub sim games are very different from SH games. As other have said ill agree that DW or 688i and sub command are more of a sensor simulation where SH3/SH4 are more of a command simulation.

What DW really needed was a dynamic campaing :P but i guess that it might be a bit odd since unrestricted warfare in the mordern age is not likely. But maybe a cold war setting :)

I would like to see DW go in this direction someday myself. Quick missions has alot of potential to build on however for mission variety. Maybe that would be a good start for Sonalysts someday.

You're not locked to the vanilla game as far as modding goes (at least modding that doesn' touch the exe file and dll's).
The downside of buying DW on steam is well steam and the fact that when official patches come out you need to wait for the steam approved version.
In my opinion you're much better off buying the retail game, you don't loose anything over the steam version and you gain much more freedom.
Just my 0.2 €.


Well randomness is built into the mission editor so "dynamic campaigns" can be developped.
If I remember correctly Silent Hunter 2 didn't have any kind of dynamic missions but enteprising modders came out with a mod that had a limited dynamic campaign engine.
So maybe something along those lines can be developped for DW.

I doubt we will ever have a full fledged dynamic campaign engine as the SH 3-4 games and to be honest I would very much prefer SCS to concetrate on the Opfor pack.
Without it DW is just over 50% of its potential.

I agree that OPFOR should be a higher priority, but a dynamic campaign engine is pretty much an expectation for this sort of sim these days. It's a close second.

OPFOR? SCS? I'm still confused just trying to figure out the Demo!!

All of the calculus and Trigonometry and Geometry in the world couldn't help me out right now! :damn:

Oh, opposing forces, duh, Kyle....

But what in God's name is SCS.


Happy Easter, By the way.

Sonalysts Combat Simulations.

I disagree about the dynamic campaign. Not that it wouldn't necessarily be a good addition, just that it is a significant omission. DW doesn't really need a dynamic campaign any more than Harpoon 3 does.

DW is scenario based, but those scenarios are very easy to create yourself - in a few minutes for simple stuff. The setting doesn't lead to WW2 "go on patrol and sink stuff" missions, and your sub's actions would be pretty much led by intel and subsequent orders anyway - which doesn't leave much for a 'campaign' to do unless it forms a full strategic layer. In the timescales concerned crew development, promotions and such would be a nonsense. And any random encounters are likely to far less interesting than designed scenarios.

IMHO $19.95 is ludicrous price for such a quality piece of software, and anyone with the slightest interest in naval warfare shouldn't hestitate in picking it up. I can't see the point of using Steam.. it's not difficult getting a box copy for a couple of dollars more. If it's still available anywhere, get hold of the spiral bound printed manual too - unlike SH4, DW did the manual bit properly.

The thing about a dynamic campaign engine for DW, is that I suspect it would mean that you wouldn't have as much flexibility in designing campaigns and scenarios.

For example, suppose they did the same thing they did in Falcon and just focused on the North Korean campaign. EVERYTHING you do with Falcon is framed in those terms, unless someone goes through the substantial trouble of figuring out how to build another campaign (which eventually someone did and made Bosnia, the Persian Gulf, Afganistan, etc) but it wasn't at all straightforward. It wasn't something that they intended most users to do.

Also, the time scale of naval warfare is very different from air combat. You don't fly "missions" per se. They're usually at sea well in advance of a conflict, and operating continuously throughout the conflict. Modern warships are usually given specific tasks to accomplish that take a lot of time (days or even weeks might not be uncommon). There's no such thing as a "general war patrol" anymore. Given that, I'm not sure that people would really be happy with a realistic dynamic campaign engine for naval warfare. Take the FFG for example, do you really want to spend weeks maintaining a specific position relative to a combat logistics ship as part of it's screen, hoping that maybe you'll run over a submarine attacking the SLOC? It's mostly pretty boring, and if it's played realistically, you'll most likely run away if you don't detect the submarine at a useful distance.

A dynamic campaign would probably mean that players experienced less variety in their assignments. Take the FFG example, for the duration of the campaign your job might be to protect the SLOC, and that's it. That vast majority of that time you're just sailing in a straight line looking at nothing.

Or a submarine, you're given a box and you need to kill the enemy surface ships in the box. That mission goes on continuously for weeks until you're out of torpedoes and then you go home.

The way DW is done now, you can play anywhere in the world, which is nice. One day I'm playing in the Persian Gulf, the next day I'm playing in North Korea, the next day I'm playing in China. You're not limited in your missions by specific tasking, you can make anything up. So... I guess my thoughts are be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. A dynamic campaign in a naval sim might be a lot less dynamic than you might think.