Dumb question about dynamic campaign

Von Talon · 03-01-10, 04:30 AM

Does dynamic campaign mean, that you can turn the tide of the war? I mean, can Germany actually win the war? Example: I sink the Ark Royal, and Bismarck doesn't get that fatal hit to her rudder by swordfish from Ark Royal! Bismarck reaches St. Nazaire and then sinks 1000000 convoys and Germany wins the war.

Possible? Can be a dumb question..

Schunken · 03-01-10, 04:46 AM

you will not able to win the war with germany....

you maybe win some battles, but not the war....

It was always discusses if germany would be able until 1941 to put 500 subs in the atlantic wii win the war....

I for myself think it have too much variable. I think the ship build industrie of the allies would always keep up with the german U-boat constructions....

also the US got "the bomb"

If germany not surender maybe the bomb hit Berlin and not Hiroshima....

Andreas

Decoman · 03-01-10, 04:49 AM

I suppose that if you do well in this game-period, success on the battlefield will mean "you are winning", however I suspect that with a later game-period (1943+), any success will mean "keep doing what you can and be content with it".

TH0R · 03-01-10, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schunken

also the US got "the bomb"

If germany not surender maybe the bomb hit Berlin and not Hiroshima....

Andreas

Who says that the Germans wouldn't have 'the bomb' if the war lasted a bit longer, or they didn't make some mistakes as they did.

Schunken · 03-01-10, 05:04 AM

Yes, the problem is "if->than"

Assume Hitler was not this racial-Fachist and never touch jewish poeple...maybe than Oppenheimer stays in germany....and developed the bomb maybe spring 44....

Maybe than today instead of "starbucks" you would have "Sauerkraut und Würstchen" in New York...

....that what I say....to much Variables

Andreas

Decoman · 03-01-10, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TH0R

Who says that the Germans wouldn't have 'the bomb' if the war lasted a bit longer, or they didn't make some mistakes as they did.

I came across an article yesterday, where it was claimed that Germany failed to advance their nuclear research (or perhaps simply failing to build a nuclear reactor), because they allegedly was not aware that they used materials that was later known for absorbing neutrons in their tests, which I guess prevented them from advancing.

Sketchy explanation, but I think this point seem plausible.

karamazovnew · 03-01-10, 05:11 AM

Screw them, it wouldn't have been the Germans that won the war but the Nazis. And you are quite right, the Atlantic War was the key to the entire European Theater. If Doenitz had had more subs at the beginning, he might've been able to scare the British into ceasefire or capitulation. And then, in December 1941, Hitler declared war on the US, mostly because of their support for the Brits with convoys and escorts. Even so, as late as 1943 the Uboats still had the chance to cut of Europe, but failed. The real surprise was that they were so effective until then.

Leandros · 03-01-10, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

Screw them, it wouldn't have been the Germans that won the war but the Nazis..

You mean, if Germany had won the war the German people would have dethroned Hitler and his cohorts for winning it....

Quote:

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

And you are quite right, the Atlantic War was the key to the entire European Theater. If Doenitz had had more subs at the beginning, he might've been able to scare the British into ceasefire or capitulation..

Hardly, Churchill might have been deposed but moved to Canada where he could continue consuming fat cigars and cognac, continuing the war with Empire resources.

Quote:

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

And then, in December 1941, Hitler declared war on the US, mostly because of their support for the Brits with convoys and escorts. Even so, as late as 1943 the Uboats still had the chance to cut of Europe, but failed..

Particularly if Hitler had not declared war on the US. I have a hard time imagining that the US would have declared war on Germany with the hard time they had in the Pacific in the beginning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

The real surprise was that they were so effective until then.

That I can agree upon......

THE_MASK · 03-01-10, 05:55 AM

By the look of the modding tools posted in the mods section i would say you can have what ever campaign you want

Hartmann · 03-01-10, 08:03 AM

A dense net of u-boats in 1941 around the island with the continuation of the air attacks targeting ports, aircraft factories, and airfields using long range bombers and fighters could did the job in england. ( adolf galland said that with aditional fuel tanks Me-109 can scort german bombers at long range targets and not be limited to half territory)

Schunken · 03-01-10, 08:21 AM

So much technical effort only for get men in skirts and fish and chips ???

No offend my british friends

Andreas

janh · 03-01-10, 10:43 AM

Back on topic! I would also be interested to know how this new "dynamic campaign" system really works. From Neal's preview it was totally clear to me whether you are being put in an area of operation, say Mediterrainean, for a certain number of missions/days. And then be put somewhere else.

Or whether you can still roam around freely on the world seas as in SHIII, just contributing to a mission/campaign goal if you happen to be in the area.

So what can you really tell us about the campaign now? What is dynamic about it? And does it really affect? Or is it tonnage "BRT" counting as before?

How about wolf packs and friendly surface raiders? Any interactions with them? How about AI (surface ships and air)?

karamazovnew · 03-01-10, 11:21 AM

I'm talking out of my arse right now as I haven't yet played the game. But you can see from the screenshots that there are certain "long term missions" in some areas. Campaign objectives like "Sink 100,000 tons before 1941" that will alter the campaign layers. This is sounds like a very neat sort of "scripted-random" campaign. With enough modding you could for example change the course of the war by protecting the Bismark. What's more, I can't think of any reason we should be able to mod the game to play until 45 (or more). The invasion of the US sounds nice.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leandros

You mean, if Germany had won the war the German people would have dethroned Hitler and his cohorts for winning it....

No, I meant that no matter how much one can value the bravery and fighting spirit of German soldiers (the Kriegsmarine in particular), they were still fighting under the wrong banner and for the wrong reasons. Had they won, we'd be kneeling before the picture of such great men as Goering and Goebbles.

Drifter · 03-01-10, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

I'm talking out of my arse right now as I haven't yet played the game. But you can see from the screenshots that there are certain "long term missions" in some areas. Campaign objectives like "Sink 100,000 tons before 1941" that will alter the campaign layers. This is sounds like a very neat sort of "scripted-random" campaign. With enough modding you could for example change the course of the war by protecting the Bismark. What's more, I can't think of any reason we should be able to mod the game to play until 45 (or more). The invasion of the US sounds nice.

You know, I just realized the same thing about scripting campaigns. and posted it in the other thread. This is VERY exciting news indeed.

03-01-10, 04:30 AM	#1
Von Talon A-ganger Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Finland Posts: 80 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 0	Dumb question about dynamic campaign Does dynamic campaign mean, that you can turn the tide of the war? I mean, can Germany actually win the war? Example: I sink the Ark Royal, and Bismarck doesn't get that fatal hit to her rudder by swordfish from Ark Royal! Bismarck reaches St. Nazaire and then sinks 1000000 convoys and Germany wins the war. Possible? Can be a dumb question.. __________________ Water is important. If there would be no water, no one could learn to swim and everybody would drown.

03-01-10, 08:03 AM	#10
Hartmann Sea Lord Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Grid CH 26, Spain ,Barcelona Posts: 1,857 Downloads: 204 Uploads: 0	A dense net of u-boats in 1941 around the island with the continuation of the air attacks targeting ports, aircraft factories, and airfields using long range bombers and fighters could did the job in england. ( adolf galland said that with aditional fuel tanks Me-109 can scort german bombers at long range targets and not be limited to half territory) __________________ But this ship can't sink!... She is made of iron, sir. I assure you, she can. and she will. It is a mathematical certainty. Strength and honor

03-01-10, 04:46 AM	#2
Schunken Medic Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 168 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	you will not able to win the war with germany.... you maybe win some battles, but not the war.... It was always discusses if germany would be able until 1941 to put 500 subs in the atlantic wii win the war.... I for myself think it have too much variable. I think the ship build industrie of the allies would always keep up with the german U-boat constructions.... also the US got "the bomb" If germany not surender maybe the bomb hit Berlin and not Hiroshima.... Andreas

03-01-10, 04:49 AM	#3
Decoman Frogman Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 306 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	I suppose that if you do well in this game-period, success on the battlefield will mean "you are winning", however I suspect that with a later game-period (1943+), any success will mean "keep doing what you can and be content with it".

03-01-10, 05:04 AM	#5
Schunken Medic Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 168 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	Yes, the problem is "if->than" Assume Hitler was not this racial-Fachist and never touch jewish poeple...maybe than Oppenheimer stays in germany....and developed the bomb maybe spring 44.... Maybe than today instead of "starbucks" you would have "Sauerkraut und Würstchen" in New York... ....that what I say....to much Variables Andreas

03-01-10, 05:11 AM	#7
karamazovnew The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 1,403 Downloads: 151 Uploads: 0	Screw them, it wouldn't have been the Germans that won the war but the Nazis. And you are quite right, the Atlantic War was the key to the entire European Theater. If Doenitz had had more subs at the beginning, he might've been able to scare the British into ceasefire or capitulation. And then, in December 1941, Hitler declared war on the US, mostly because of their support for the Brits with convoys and escorts. Even so, as late as 1943 the Uboats still had the chance to cut of Europe, but failed. The real surprise was that they were so effective until then.

03-01-10, 05:55 AM	#9
THE_MASK Ace of the deep . Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 9,226 Downloads: 901 Uploads: 73	By the look of the modding tools posted in the mods section i would say you can have what ever campaign you want

03-01-10, 08:21 AM	#11
Schunken Medic Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 168 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	So much technical effort only for get men in skirts and fish and chips ??? No offend my british friends Andreas

03-01-10, 10:43 AM	#12
janh Stinking drunk in Trinidad Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 349 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Back on topic! I would also be interested to know how this new "dynamic campaign" system really works. From Neal's preview it was totally clear to me whether you are being put in an area of operation, say Mediterrainean, for a certain number of missions/days. And then be put somewhere else. Or whether you can still roam around freely on the world seas as in SHIII, just contributing to a mission/campaign goal if you happen to be in the area. So what can you really tell us about the campaign now? What is dynamic about it? And does it really affect? Or is it tonnage "BRT" counting as before? How about wolf packs and friendly surface raiders? Any interactions with them? How about AI (surface ships and air)?