Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SeaQueen
There's not really a technical problem behind it, though. It's more a problem with the scenario designers. I think the problem you're describing is a symptom of several things. First, in order to hold most people's attention, a scenario must be exciting. That means they want to quickly be in a situation where they can start shooting and evading torpedoes. People want their scenarios to be fun, and sailing around an empty box looking for an elusive submarine can be boring. Unfortunately, in a real ASW battle, you're going to spend a lot of time sailing around an empty box, which brings me to the next problem.
When you look at the numbers, then for the sonar performances that say, a 688i has in the game, and make some assumptions about search speed, then you can easily search a 50mile box in 10-12 hours, often less, but people don't want to play for that long. The truth is, a lot of ASW is sailing around looking at nothing. Too often victory is defined as "nothing happens." That makes for very poor video gaming, unfortunately.
|
Well, I come from the Silent Hunter community, where you can literally search for weeks of game time (hour upon hour of real time) and not find anything, but me I'm cool with that-finally locating a target makes that encounter all the more special. I don't see very many posters who come both here and over there (not trying to start a flame war understand
), so I guess its just community standards at work. I like starting farther away from the enemy in a blue water scenario because then the convergence zones come into play-what's the point of placing the enemy inside the last CZ like I see in so many scenarios?