Albrecht Von Hesse

Fantastic post! Only reason I didn't quote the whole thing was to save space.

Your topic title says it all: some people play for the realism, and some just to play, and most somewhere down the middle. There really is no right or wrong way to enjoy the game. It's all simply personal preference.

Myself? I have, at times, played 100% realism, with every 'assist' I'm aware of turned off. Mostly I play with auto targeting, if only for the reason you mentioned: I'm one person, and targeting and firing took quite a few people working hand-in-hand together.

There are tons of threads, tutorials and articles on how to set up firing solutions with absolutely no assist. I'm sure lots of people will be responding and give you their tips and techniques.

As for me, my way probably isn't the greatest. This is what I do at 100% realism, and no in-game 'assistance'. Once I've made contact I try and position myself to gather information. If it was a sound contact, almost always that's at long range first, which is somewhere around 20 klicks out. I sit at dead stop, at 20 meters, and get a bearing. I get another 10 minutes later, another 10 after that, and a forth 10 after that. That enables me to generate a vector angle. It doesn't help for range, but as it's most likely 20 klicks out to start I have a rough idea. I guesstimate a speed of 9 knots then surface and set a bearing that, based on my speed versus theirs, should start me on an intercept course. Depending on speeds and distances, again guesstimating, I'll resubmerge and gather another set of bearings versus time. Normally this is enough to eventually bring me into visual range (unless it's a 'dark and stormy night'; 400 meter visibility is loads of fun).

Once visual, either by interception via the above, or by 'bumping' into them ("Smoke on the horizon!") or by receiving a contact report and racing that way, I'll again come to dead stop and start taking measurements. Depending on various factors that's either done surfaced or submerged. It's similar to the above, in that I measure a bearing, wait, do it again, wait, then do it again. Without a range measurement all I can do is generate a vector, but that's enough to start me manuevering into position.

Where it gets fun is target identification. You can't accurately measure range unless you've accurately identified the target, as you need to know the mast height to do the computation. Once I've identified the target (hopefully correctly) then I begin adding range measurements to the bearing ones. Together, they permit me to generate their actual course, and not just a general vector. I usually don't worry about speed measurements at that point. Depending on the target class and type (and other factors, like if they are in a convoy, or a singleton) I'll use 5, 7 or 9 knots (based upon past experience with them).

Plotting their course, and measuring distance travelled versus time, versus my distance to travel and my speed, I try to set an approach course that has me in firing position 500 meters away, 70 - 110 AoB and a bearing of 0 +/- 30 degrees, with my speed at 1 knot or less. As they get closer measuring range becomes easier (unless rough weather . . . wheeeee . . . roller coaster!). If I can, once they are roughly perpendicular to my I'll do a speed measurement but, more often than not I override that and simply enter what I think their speed actually is.

I do enjoy playing at that level. Sometimes. But mostly I find having a few 'cheats' makes the game more fun and enjoyable for me.