Observations on Realistic Realism and gameplay

[Bosje]

So you're bored and you start writing something which you think may be worth writing, for consideration by the community.

Why, what?


This is not a comparison of various mods, it is not a set of rules by which to play the game, it is neither a gripe on the stock game nor a celebration of any mod. It is simply what the title suggests: an observation on realistic gameplay in so far as the game engine realistically allows it. These observations are the result of playing Silent Hunter 1 through 4, reading much of what is written on these excellent forums, watching a fair amount of movies and documentaries and reading a modest collection of relevant books. I hope to provide the veterans with an interesting read while providing a number of gameplay suggestions to those newcomers who were looking for ways to enhance their gaming experience by taking submarine warfare seriously. In the course of writing, it inevitably focused on the Atlantic side of things, since that is where most of my own knowledge and gaming experience is based, but I do feel that the basic principles hold true for both operational theatres and as such I feel that this forum is the best place for it. Much of this will apply to SH3 as well but SH4 UBM is simply the latest thing.


As my join date suggests I am a relative newcomer myself. Even if I have been learning much about submarine warfare in WWII, I am likely to be incorrect in some of my comments and observations. In addition to that, historical sources are notoriously one-sided (I have three books myself, each of which contradicts the others on many 'facts'). Fortunately, this community is known to correct itself where needed so I invite (and expect) you all to add your own thoughts and to point out any serious errors. I don't presume much, despite what you may think, lol.


So much for the introduction, let's get cracking.


-
Realistic Realism? Reality check please...


It is a computer game, of course, which means that one is limited to sitting on a deskchair, watching a screen and hitting certain keys on the keyboard. Realistic Realism therefore means the amount of realism you can realistically throw into your approach of the game, if you still follow me. If you get your spouse/girlfriend/offspring/pet/roommate/partner to throw a bucket of water over your head as the boat crashes into an Atlantic roller, you may well wreck some of your hardware. Bad weather resulting in faulty equipment is quite realistic, but perhaps not quite desirable from a gameplay point of view. A childish example but the same applies to many issues that have to do with the much discussed concept of Realism. The Atlantic Ocean towards the end of 1940 featured some severely terrible weather and only one convoy was ever engaged during the whole month of december. Some further sinkings were accomplished due to chance encounters with lone merchants but that was about it (David Mason, U-boat - the secret menace, 1968). These forums, however, are rife with gripes about 3 week rainstorms and not being able to attack anything for a month. A usual comment in such gripes is: 'Having a hard time is fine, but this is just ridiculous!'


So, we don't want a month of bad weather, because we'd spend that month on high time compression waiting for the weather to clear up. I do not expect to find many players who would sit there, looking at the rain, listening to the rain, sulking, reading mildew ridden books, wearing damp clothing and generally being miserable. All the while actually swelling with happiness inside: 'This is fantastic!' Yah, unlikely. So we don't want that kind of realism. We are happy to contend with bad weather for a bit and then we are very happy to find the weather clearing up while we shadow that convoy, setting up for a night attack. That, of course, also happened often enough during the real thing, and we'll all say: 'This is fantastic!' But even if we look for enjoyment from playing our game, most of those who read this will want to live through the fear, horror, excitement and boredom which the real skippers lived through in real life. Immersion is the word.


Realism is in the mind of the beholder. Or somesuch.


“And what the heck is realism anyway? Tater observed that in Trigger Maru, unrealistic enemy behavior results in extremely realistic player behavior. You are properly operating in fear for your life. Wow! How authentic! Therefore you do not take stupid chances. You cannot just duck below the thermal layer, put it on silent running and go eat lunch. You will be dead when you return. When being depth charged, you MUST evade. They will kill you. Be afraid. Very afraid. It's wonderful”


Rockin Robbins nails it down in the above quote. Tigone adds:


“...Accuracy is objective; either the height of this ship's mast in the game is correct or it's not. Realism, though -- the feel, the affective domain in which the game connects with the player -- is much more subjective, and arguably harder to attain. While both accuracy and realism are criticial in an historical game like SH4, the realism factor remains even when there's no real-life counterpart to measure accuracy by (think of almost any science fiction game title)...”


These quotes are taken from a discussion which took place on these forums. Originally titled 'RFB vs TMO', it developed into a very illuminating read about perceived realism. ( http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=140918 )


Realism, then, does not exist anywhere except in the imagination of the player. You are not on a submarine, you are sitting on a deskchair in front of a computer. Possibly smoking a cigarette and drinking a glass of beer as a convoy heaves into view. The curtains are closed because otherwise the monitor would just reflect the interior of your study, rather than reveal the enemy against a star lit sky at night. The lower right corner says it's 1.00 am, December 12th ,1942. But it is also just after dinner on a late summer's evening, 2008. What we are talking about is the illusion of realism, measured by what your imagination expects it to be. As such, each individual's perception will be slightly different. Some will surround themselves with trinkets and memorabilia and gadgets from the era, using authentic sliderules and chronometers to assist with plotting and keeping a written log as the war patrol goes on. Some will park the camera on the pillow of the captain's bed, whisper 'good night, boys' to the radio room crew and go to bed in 2008, hoping their Type VIIB will still be there in 1943 as they wake up. Some will do their own manual targeting, others will allow their crew to take care of that while still attempting realistic gameplay. Whatever floats your boat, as they say. Relative Realism is perhaps a more accurate description and it's largely a matter of taste.


What, then, is the purpose of this post?


As stated in the introduction, I intend to provide the veterans with a hopefully interesting read while providing suggestions to those newcomers who were looking for a proper Submarine Simulator, rather than the arcade game which they got when they bought the thing from the shops. Having said that, the dev team does of course deserve due credit for making the games in the first place. Popular opinion holds that they created the stock games to appeal to the casual gamer while leaving it up to the community to modify it for those who are looking for a more serious and historically accurate approach. Much information can be found on these forums even if it requires much browsing and searching. This post hopefully serves as a decent summary of ways to play the game realistically\historically accurately, leaving it up to the individual to determine what they consider to be real.



From here, I shall attempt to provide thoughts on the various aspects of submarine warfare as you encounter them during play, possibly coming up with the odd dogma or truism.



Should I stay or should I go? Engage or evade aircraft and escorts.


The main factor in all of this is the behaviour of you, the player, the Commander of the boat. Do you dive to safety, do you run away, do you engage or do you do nothing at all? At this stage I am tempted to leave the stock game for what it is but the fact is that you are perfectly free to dive from aircraft, even if the stock game allows you to shoot it out with a good chance of killing the bomber without your boat getting a scratch. Likewise, you are free to either engage a destroyer with your deckgun or to attempt a submerged getaway. You can leave the gun alone, even if the stock game allows surviving a gunfight. Many players will have experience with mods like GWX, TMO and RFB, where one quickly learns to fear aircraft and one no longer even considers using the deckgun for anything other than finishing off a crippled freighter. That is exactly the kind of behaviour displayed by the real skippers and as such, those mods are celebrated as highly realistic, but there is a catch. A German account from the 1950s mentions many surface encounters where the Uboat ran at full speed on the surface, passing destroyers at ranges as close as 200 meters, slipping inside the convoy lanes and picking out the juiciest of targets from within before slipping away in the darkness (Harald Busch, So war der U-Boot Krieg, 1955). This is an impossibility with any game setup I ever tried. Either the game makes them kill you, or the game makes them incompetent boy scouts. Randomness and luck is hard to script. I could be wrong here, of course, since I know little about coding. But even GWX which models the progressive Allied skill as the war drags on, does not allow me to actually go inside the convoy lanes, fire torpedoes and get away on the surface in 1939 (except in rainstorms before radar is available and from my sources, attacking under such conditions was not commonplace). In the end, the stock game is not all that bad for serving our purpose, even if I stay away from it myself. What matters is your decision as the skipper, do you run or do you fight?


So then we can ignore any difference between stock and all the available mods, we can simply take the official submarine manuals of the day and say: The Aircraft is the biggest enemy of The Submarine. Even if you have a pea-shooter and even if you have shot them down in the game before, history tells us that Coastal Command is responsible for the majority of U-boat kills (I don't know about Pacific records but I assume the real skippers were quite afraid of the real Japanese aircraft). You are to be afraid of aircraft and you are to crash dive immediately upon sighting them. Radar, radar warning receivers and an experienced lookout are all aids to increase your survivability, in that you get to dive sooner. Period. (For German crews, during the summer of 1943 it was briefly fashionable to attempt a gunfight, as ordered by BdU since the air patrols were so dense that it became almost impossible to even reach the open ocean from the French ports. However, after losing many boats for only limited successes this order was soon reversed.)


And so we are afraid of aircraft and we dive on sight, sweating and hoping that we survive their initial bombing run.


As for surface ships: warships have a harder time spotting us than we have spotting them (radar aside), so it is possible to evade them on the surface at night or in other low visibility conditions. Radar upsets the balance but it should be noted that your radar is not guaranteed to pick up on them, and vice versa. Your boat is after all a small thing. It is even possible to engage a warship (either capital or escort) from the surface, getting quite close at night, even late in the war, even with supermods. Submarines did engage warships in both theatres, and with success, with their main weapon: the torpedo. Such attacks were made both from the surface and from periscope depth. With some skill and experience, the game allows exciting and rewarding torpedo attacks on warships and there is no reason to shy away from those (more on torpedo attacks later). But for our purpose of realistic behaviour, a gunfight is of course out of the question. Speaking of guns, there is a further observation to be made:


Did submarines never fire their guns at destroyers? Yes they sure did. Just before the destroyer lived up to its name by destroying the submarine. You see, the escorts did not really engage the submarine with their guns, historically. That only happened at long ranges, where the main battery of the destroyer could actually be trained to hit the sub's hull and the sub would (and should) be quick to dive under such conditions. You lose, try again later but thank you for playing. Of course, you will not usually find yourself under fire from long range because you do not usually steam into the enemy's visual range in daylight, right? (more on surface operations later). You approach the enemy at night and they only spot you at close range and that's where trouble starts.


Typically, the destroyer would race straight towards the submarine in an attempt to ram, while the sub was still on the surface or while it was attempting to dive. If successful, this resulted in a severely crumbled bow on the destroyer and a severely wrecked hull on the submarine. The destroyer could take such damage, even if it did require a hasty return to port for extensive repairs. It was considered to be worth it: one damaged escort for one wrecked sub. (There are even some records of escorts going down with the submarine, both hulls completely devastated by the collision.) The submarine would be in serious trouble at this stage and was forced to blow all ballast . If lucky enough, it popped up, no longer operational, and it would either be abandoned by the crew before sinking back down, or it would sometimes attempt a desperate fight. Those are the recorded occasions where submarines engaged destroyers with their deckgun. And the destroyers typically won, charging in for another collision while the sub's decks were peppered with small arms fire, machine guns and things like Oerlikons and Bofors (20mm and 40mm AA). Or with the main guns from range. (This is from what I presume to know, I lack sufficient sources about the Pacific Theatre so if anyone has more details on that, I'd appreciate it.)


Interestingly, in the game with any mod they always engage you with their main guns at close range though my sources insist that a destroyer's main battery could not be trained down low enough to shoot at submarines from close ranges. History suggests that, on sighting you, they charged straight at you, crushing you with their mass unless you made like a bakery truck and hauled buns. There is the famous account of a German Kaleun who died a rather gruesome death getting pinned between his own conning tower and the bows of an escort. This does not happen in the game (not to me, anyway), although you will find yourself rammed at periscope depth by an escort which charges straight over you on it's depth charge run. So...


By all means attempt your torpedo attack from the surface, evading and avoiding escorts as you go, or even engaging the escorts themselves in an effort to remove your target's protection! (This also actually happened during the war.) But if they catch you on the surface (and they will, sooner or later), get out of there asap. To put it another way: leave the gun alone and either run away on the surface or seek refuge in the deep. The fact that they will hurt you bad with gunfire, rather than actually ramming you is just something you have to contend with but it amounts to the same thing, whatever your setup:


If the escorts catch us on the surface we can expect to be in trouble and we should be afraid. If we do not want to risk our boat, then we shouldn't come close. Being daring can have both great rewards and severe consequences. If we DO go in on the surface, we should be prepared to pay the price.


This thing is getting much longer than I thought it was going to be, I'll just post this now and see if anyone is actually interested before proceeding onto evasion, engaging and the matter of general surface operations from a historical point of view.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Bosje

Did submarines never fire their guns at destroyers?

Pretty long post, but this sentance jumped out at me.

"Fire guns at destroyers?!" What are you nuts? If your in that kind of range your focus should be on evasion. Even exchanging rounds with a merchant can be deadly. Not to mention the DD turning your way and flat out running you over.

No... not on my boat we dont 'fire at destoyers'.

[Fincuan]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Pretty long post, but this sentance jumped out at me.

"Fire guns at destroyers?!"

You should have continued reading, it goes on like this: "Yes they sure did. Just before the destroyer lived up to its name by destroying the submarine."

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Fincuan

You should have continued reading, it goes on like this: "Yes they sure did. Just before the destroyer lived up to its name by destroying the submarine."

I did, I cannot remember any instances where a sub was foolish enough to conduct a running gun battle with a destoyer. Prove me wrong Id love to read about it.

[tomoose]

Bosje;
you're touching on all the points that generally cause debate etc but as you state "realism is in the eye of the beholder". That's the luxury of this game, some guys like to rack up the kills and be completely brazen with their tactics while others love the sneak and shoot technique.

I, for one, like to think I play "realistically" (i.e. 100%) in that there's no external cam, everything is manual and underestimating the enemy can be deadly. This results in, maybe, one or two kills per patrol but the satisfaction of manouevering, stalking and lining up those kills is immense.

Other players don't have that kind of patience or simply don't get enjoyment out of that style of play and can adjust the game to suit them, that's the beauty of the game itself (and the mods).

[Rockin Robbins]

A fine post! Please continue with your observations. Having been quoted while I myself was quoting tater, I'll consider myself in the sights of a destroyer's main batteries.


Carry on sir, I'll observe from radar depth.

[Armistead]

I play at 100%, cams off. Before when I played with contacts on it was easy to get speed using the 3 minute marking rule from far away. I could get a perfect set and would seldom raise the periscope, just shoot when they were in range.

Figuring track and speed without contacts, cams has become a job, moreso for fast TF.

Using Radar, it's fairly easy to get a track. Still I'm having a problem using sonar to figure track and speed. Is there a method here I'm missing. With merchants, I will ping them, mark bearing and distance on the map. Then I repeat until I figure a track. Obvious, you see nothing on the map, but the marks get you close, then I'll draw a line between the marks and get a base track.

Is there away to get speed using sonar. Can you ping, get distance, wait three minutes, ping again..distance...and with those two ranges somehow figure speed with some formula.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Prove me wrong Id love to read about it.

This started as a fantastic thread about realism being in our heads. Why is it suddenly an argument on what's 'realistic'?

Excellent job, Bosje. I particularly like the distinction between the way we play ourselves and the way we want the game to make us play. I'm looking forward to more.

i found the part about DD guns not going low enough to shoot at close range to be quite interesting.

what would be the minimum realistic range they could fire low enough to hit you?

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

This started as a fantastic thread about realism being in our heads. Why is it suddenly an argument on what's 'realistic'?.

You know what your right, Ill just sit and watch now.

[Hartmann]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

I did, I cannot remember any instances where a sub was foolish enough to conduct a running gun battle with a destoyer. Prove me wrong Id love to read about it.

HMCS Assiniboine vs U-210 during a 30 minutes fight.

u-boat lost and survivors rescued, destroyer with gun damage and one death