Map contact icons

Annatar · 12-29-08, 06:00 PM

I've noticed in GWX3.0 that enabling and disabling this option has no effect on the realism percentage. I've been toying with having it turned off, but tracking a target without it is incredibly difficult. Still, I'm prepared to learn and to keep at it if it's the most historically accurate option, and that's the basis for my question really - although I guess neither on or off is truly accurate, what would you say best represents the experience of an historical captain?

My thoughts are that in reality the commander would obviously not have magical lines pointing the exact direction to his target, but then it also wouldn't be the commanders job to track them anyway - he would get range and distance information, perhaps with a suggested interception course (represented by those lines) from one of his subordinates, I guess?

Perhaps I'm way off.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Also, while I'm here - I heard mention once that the swaying of the periscope in SH3 is not how they acted in reality and that clicking the option to stabilise it is probably more realistic than not - can anybody confirm or deny this?

Weiss Pinguin · 12-29-08, 06:26 PM

I've got them on. My reasoning is that the crew would've marked out the target they were tracking. Probably not with the accuracy we have in SH3, but that can't be helped so far as I know. Also, flying blind would just be frustrating for me personally, mainly because numbers are not my strong suite.

12-29-08, 06:00 PM	#1
Annatar Machinist's Mate Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Merry Old England Posts: 121 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Map contact icons I've noticed in GWX3.0 that enabling and disabling this option has no effect on the realism percentage. I've been toying with having it turned off, but tracking a target without it is incredibly difficult. Still, I'm prepared to learn and to keep at it if it's the most historically accurate option, and that's the basis for my question really - although I guess neither on or off is truly accurate, what would you say best represents the experience of an historical captain? My thoughts are that in reality the commander would obviously not have magical lines pointing the exact direction to his target, but then it also wouldn't be the commanders job to track them anyway - he would get range and distance information, perhaps with a suggested interception course (represented by those lines) from one of his subordinates, I guess? Perhaps I'm way off. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Also, while I'm here - I heard mention once that the swaying of the periscope in SH3 is not how they acted in reality and that clicking the option to stabilise it is probably more realistic than not - can anybody confirm or deny this?

12-29-08, 06:26 PM	#2
Weiss Pinguin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Auburn, Alabama Posts: 3,333 Downloads: 101 Uploads: 0	I've got them on. My reasoning is that the crew would've marked out the target they were tracking. Probably not with the accuracy we have in SH3, but that can't be helped so far as I know. Also, flying blind would just be frustrating for me personally, mainly because numbers are not my strong suite. __________________