SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- Silent Hunter 5 (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=244)

- - Why SH3 ... (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=161262)

We have modders ... :D

wasnt the time for this thread to be posted like 6 months ago?

i mean other then a way to talk about something other then the DRM/OSP

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webster (Post 1257517)

wasnt the time for this thread to be posted like 6 months ago?

No, because 6 months ago nobody was saying "SH5 sucks, I'm off to play SH3+supermod".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikhayl (Post 1257514)

...and stuff I hope SH5 will adress.

Aside from the many little (or not so little) details that SH3 missed, there's some big gameplay flaws that kill the game for me:

-Boring navigation. You click on the map to put waypoints up to your patrol zone, then hit the time compression and just wait until something happens. Something being either an aircraft spotted, or a ship spotted. This brings me to the next point:

-Boring u-boat simulation. Let's face it, this aspect is almost totally absent from SH3. No separate engine management. No meaningful use of compressed air. No actual ballast. The boat handles like an arcade game. Forward, back, right, left, dive, surface, level. Trim dives aren't necessary, engines don't overheat, nothing breaks down.
The bottom line is, there's absolutely nothing to do in game between the moment you leave port and the moment you make contact with the enemy, except for the aforementionned waypoints and pressing the time compression key. Boring. You might as well have a random mission generator and start within visual range of enemy shipping.

-Boring campaign. Sure, it's somewhat randomized, enemy skills and ASW evolve, but then what? There's the obvious "I sunk Nelson 5 times between September 1939 and June 1940". And the fact that your presence in the game world is meaningless. If you pick a sweet spot in the Western Approaches, you can hammer enemy convoys here with no actual enemy reaction, then go back home, and on your next patrol do the exact same thing.
Basically after some hours of play, you know where to go and where not to go, and these spots only slightly change as the campaign scripting is altered over the years.

-Boring torpedoes. Manual targetting was ok in SH3, and mods have made it a very strong point of SH3 (strongest IMO). But the torpedoes are much too reliable (=boring). They can detonate too early, ok. But that's it. They maintain depth perfectly, they can breech the surface in rough weather and keep going straight like nothing is happening, they don't deviate one bit from their course (not even an abstract representation of sea currents).
If you read on Prien's attack of Scapa Flow, only 2 out of 5 torpedoes hit the static targets. He says "The torpedo misses I explain due to faults of course, speed, and drift. In tube 4, a misfire."

SH5 will adress the campaign and that's a big immersion booster.
The presence of the whole crew and some tidbits in the crew descriptions on the SH5 website bring some hope regarding the boringness while transitting to your patrol zone (mentions of trim dive, navigator's role...)
Nothing yet regarding targetting and torpedoes

i totally agree. i also feel the same with sh4.
in sh4 if watch crew got injured then all the watch crews where injured.:damn:

@Webster
We didn't have any information six months ago. We now have some and the rest will hopefully come soon.

@Mikhayl
I agree with your points, except the boat handling. I don't mind if they want to spice up the realism of the way the boat handles (i.e. the physics) but I still want to just say "go forward" and let my crew do the rest. I have no interest in trimming ballasts or whatever; personally I want a strategic/tactical game/simulation, not a "sailing" simulator.

but my point was 6 months ago there was at least a small chance some of these wants might be looked at by the devs and able to make it into the game, but now they are most likely way beyond any possible inclusions into future game patches

Quote:

Boring torpedoes. Manual targetting was ok in SH3, and mods have made it a very strong point of SH3 (strongest IMO). But the torpedoes are much too reliable (=boring). They can detonate too early, ok. But that's it. They maintain depth perfectly, they can breech the surface in rough weather and keep going straight like nothing is happening, they don't deviate one bit from their course (not even an abstract representation of sea currents).
If you read on Prien's attack of Scapa Flow, only 2 out of 7 torpedoes hit the static targets. He says "The torpedo misses I explain due to faults of course, speed, and drift. In tube 4, a misfire."

SH4 had this with exception of current affecting the torps. I hope that found it's way in.

I agree with that, I wouldn't want to spend hours turning valves all around the boat either. But I'd like to have at least something to do during the cruise, otherwise we might as well start patrols at sea North of the Shetland.

In SH3 you can do "make believe" trim dives to break the boredom but there's no in game incentive to do so: your boat is always perfectly level at periscope depth and maintains it flawlessly, which another "boring" factor.

When this is all true, tell why are you then buying the SH series?
There must be something appealing to you in the games (or else you wouldn't be buying/playing them)?

Err, at less than two knots your boat won't maintain it's depth that well with GWX, at least not the chosen depth.

Maybe you're right Webster, but I doubt it would change anything and I didn't think about that 6 months ago anyway :)

Now I thought a lot about this while "playing", especially the navigation part.

As I said in the OP, in SH3 (and worse in SH4) navigation is just plain boring. Set points, crank up TC, wait contact. In the Pacific even at 4096TC you can wait over 15 minutes to get anything to do!

Now, imagine a system with no GPS waypoints and no sub icon (at 100% realism).
You have two options, either full manual navigation or assisted by the AI (just like targetting in SH3).

You start from port so you know where you are, you go the map, and place a "waypoint" on the map, but there's no "wire" between the points and your boat.

In full manual, you set course and you calculate the time/speed/distance to get to that point, set your speed, set the amount of time, and when you're ready you don't use time compression but rather a "warp" key like in most combat flight simulators.

In automatic, just place the point and hit "warp".

If there's no contact on the way, the warp stops when you reach your waypoint. At this point, since there's no sub icon or anything, you have to make a navigation fix. In automatic the navigator just places the point on the map, his accuracy depending on the conditions (cloudy? time of the day to make the fix?) and on his experience.

In manual you do it yourself like in the realnav mod for SH3/4, only better integrated. The world doesn't to be round, if the referencials are adapted to a cylindrical world.

So basically you do have things to do during patrol other than sink stuff and avoid aircrafts. You calculate your position and your course to your next waypoint. The warp time is as fast as computer and game programming allow. Once you're out of warp, you can perform trim dive to improve or maintain the boat handling over the course of the patrol. Then make your sun/star fix, plot your next waypoint, and warp again.

When your warp is interrupted by a contact, you can use "direct navigation" to shadow a convoy or the like, and use "classic" time compression if you want/need to shadow until the night or whatnot.

Once the attack is finished and contact is lost, you have to make a position fix and then resume patrol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Enigma (Post 1257551)

When this is all true, tell why are you then buying the SH series?
There must be something appealing to you in the games (or else you wouldn't be buying/playing them)?

In SH3, the great part for me is shadowing a convoy at the limit of visual range, plotting a firing solution well before the attack, then get myself in position, strike and escape. That's quite well done and a real blast. But honestly the rest of the game is mostly boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schroeder (Post 1257560)

Err, at less than two knots your boat won't maintain it's depth that well with GWX, at least not the chosen depth.

IIRC in GWX your boat just rises 1 meter or so and that's it. In NYGM your boat sinks if you don't move (no humming bird mod) which is a bit better at abstracting the situation but not perfect. But the main point is that your actions (trim dive or lack of) have no influence on depth keeping.

Mikhayl, hats off for reminding us about the actual GAME features :haha:

When SH5 was just announced, the old "What would you like to see in SH5" thread was resurrected. Most of those have been left out...

-The campaign seems to have been addressed by the devs themselves, we'll only need to mod the game beyond 43... easy as a Wolfram cake.
-The torpedo errors are an absolute MUST. Hopefully we will have more freedom in modding their scripts. One absolute bonus would be to take in account the actual position of the sub and the weather. We'll see about that in March.

The other two points you've made just brings back the old "I want to do this for immersion/I don't want to do this because the captain didn't" topic. Tell me guys, is there a point in actually sitting at the Radio Station before the radar is installed? NO, but it's still nice to be able to do it, right?

-navigation: fun to do manually but... no tides, no currents, no wind factor... no real maps.. pointless. We asked for an "area of uncertainty" and estimated navigation dependent on the navigator's skill. That seems to have been ignored by the devs. However we've only seen the "easy" interface so maybe we're lucky. I truly HATE GPS.
- uboat trimming: what's the point in doing it manually? While sitting at the periscope?! Ok, let the Chief do it but put a bit of randomness in it devs :up:. It's one of those aspects that we don't really want to control all the time, but we want to know it's there.

Very good points, very good post Mikhayl. :yep:

I wish i'd see this type of system implemented, but i guess i won't because we would lack the ''warp'' button.

Yet... i think maybe this would shorten patrols a lot, and considering we don't even have a full lenght campaign it would hurt deeply lol! :hmmm: