How Do You Think Renown Should Be Awarded
 

I posted a reply in another thread and relised I was a bit off topic.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...=104257&page=3
So heres a new thread...

Renown...
How do you think it should be awarded?

On the basis on tonnage,
Percieved threat through Kriegsmarine eyes,
Or a completely different way?

One thing I would really like to see is increasing renown as the war progresses and sinking ships gets harder and harder.

Be patient and your request will become available soon ;)

Alhtough I'm currently playing mostly GWX for the many great additions to the game, I actually prefer the NYGM model of tonnage as renown. This is more historically accurate and if the adjustments are made to make the upgrades more expensive so they are equivalent to the "old" renown system.

:rotfl: The timing of Frenssen's request is exquisite.

'Patience is a virtue'...they say. :arrgh!:

In my opinion the systems not far from right. After all in was a "Tonnage War" as Donitz himself said.

But I think it would be nice if the game could reflect the extra kudos a commander and his boat would have for sinking particulally prominent enemy vessels.

Even if he had never sunk another ship Priene's name was already made with the sinking of the Royal Oak.

Or even for being successful against extreme odds. For example destroying a DD under normal conditions is next to worthless. But how about after nearly a days attempt to evade him under constant attack, you sink him and bring all your crew home alive? Would that story not circulate around the base, boosting your renown?

But then we've all got our own wish list for SH3 right? Very few have the ability to actually do anything about it.

I agree with you up to a point TarJak. I think the ideal system would have been a mixed one. Renown based on tonnage with respect to merchant ships and "special renown bonus" (even in terms of medals) for sinking "important" military ships like Aircraft Carriers and Battleships. I have the feeling that this is not possible though given the current structure of GWX.

I always thought that as well,suprised it was never implemented considering to even get to 1944 is a major achievment:hmm:

As stated above be patient. GWX Team thinks before you for you ;) :yep:

By my mom.:smug: That way even when I have a bad patrol she'll give me my due.

:|\\

Mel, I think it should be possible if you edit the renown on the carriers and battleships above and beyond the tonnage. The only problem would then come from ships sunk in a harbour raid which I also think should be rewarded differently.

IMHO, the tonnage on the larger targets in the tonnage model should actually be reward enough if you get the upgrade cost balance right.

It is possible but not very efficient. To do this you need to have double entries for ships. One entry for the open seas and one for the harbours. I think BBW will not be too happy with this idea ;) :p The simplest we can do to give a bit of realism is to have year-based renown awarded. That way because the increase is commulative the High Value Targets (Tankers, Battleships etc) will yield far more renown later in the war than they do in the beggining.

Not just BBW. ;)

Indeed, this could only be achieved by cloning each unit and using one clone (with one renown figure) for harbour traffic and one clone (with a different renown figure) for open sea.

Or, to put it another way, it means adding 1GB or so of files to the game.

Certainly not worth it IMHO.