SH3 commander malfunctions and sabotage...

[Lanzfeld]

Originally Posted by mooncatt

i think you have to RTB to fix the malfunctions
as for seeing fuel leakage i dont see why not, when you sink a ship you can see a slick so i imagine you would on your boat too

No....

Some malfunctions can be "fixed at sea" by reloading SH-3 Commander and some cannot. I just want to know which ones cannot.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Originally Posted by Lanzfeld

No....

Some malfunctions can be "fixed at sea" by reloading SH-3 Commander and some cannot. I just want to know which ones cannot.

As far as I know every malfunction can be 'repaired' by reloading SH3 Commander. It's just they are generated completely randomly every time anew and the programme doesn't know, what malfuynction there was before.

But if you are interested in saving as much realism, as possible (and you probably are), you have to judge on yourself, what is repairable and what is not. For example I'd assume any periscope malfunction applying to optics is non-fixable as you don't have know-how, equipment nor clean enough environment to do anything about optics. In the same manner I'd suppose that almost any engine malfunction can be repaired at sea... But I'm not a machinist and cannot say for sure. I've never even had a car.

[Lanzfeld]

Originally Posted by Abd_von_Mumit

As far as I know every malfunction can be 'repaired' by reloading SH3 Commander. It's just they are generated completely randomly every time anew and the programme doesn't know, what malfuynction there was before.

But if you are interested in saving as much realism, as possible (and you probably are), you have to judge on yourself, what is repairable and what is not. For example I'd assume any periscope malfunction applying to optics is non-fixable as you don't have know-how, equipment nor clean enough environment to do anything about optics. In the same manner I'd suppose that almost any engine malfunction can be repaired at sea... But I'm not a machinist and cannot say for sure. I've never even had a car.

Hmmm...

Please read this thread Abd von Mumit

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...light=sabatage

It says that certain malfunctions are NOT fixable at sea with a reload.

Now I am confussed.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Checking in progress... ("As far as I know" meant I could be wrong, as what I wrote was based only on my experiences with SH3 Commander).

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Actually it seems nothing said here was true, as the true lies between. Read very carefully this post: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...9&postcount=11

It says that some malfunctions are repairable and some are not, but this is generated randomly regardless of the malfunction type (IF I UNDERSTAND that correctly).

[Lanzfeld]

Originally Posted by Abd_von_Mumit

Actually it seems nothing said here was true, as the true lies between. Read very carefully this post: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...9&postcount=11

It says that some malfunctions are repairable and some are not, but this is generated randomly regardless of the malfunction type (IF I UNDERSTAND that correctly).

Thanks you.

Any idea what a fuel leak looks like?

[Capt. Morgan]

In my experience, I found I could fix any malfunction by simply reloading the game through SH3 commander, but this time with the malfunctions/sabotage option turned off.

[danexpat]

SH Commander is a terrific add-on but I might turn this feature off (I have malfunctions on) after reading further. One malfunction should not be magically "fixed" only to be potentially replaced with another mid-cruise IMO. This aspect goes to the statistical probability of failure, which shouldn't be tied to how often you are able to play the game.

[desirableroasted]

And we are resurrecting a four-year old thread why?

[Damo]

Originally Posted by desirableroasted

And we are resurrecting a four-year old thread why?

Is it really such a PITA? After all, you could of just clicked the back button and gone on your merry way, instead of wasting more of your time by posting, whereas the people that haven't been here 4 years might gain valuable info from it. I don't see the problem.

[danexpat]

Originally Posted by desirableroasted

And we are resurrecting a four-year old thread why?

I just get in line wherever I see people queuing up. Baaaaa!

But seriously, as someone who has been active from time to time on a number of different game fora for us avid (OCD?) war gamers, I personally think it's respectful and appropriate, given the often considerable time and effort already put in by others, when newcomers actually use the damned search feature to try and get answers to their questions.

[Sailor Steve]

Danexpat, you have nothing to apologize for or explain, as you aren't the one who unearthed the necro. The poster before you is guilty of the greatest faux-pas - not for resurrecting the thread but for responding to a four-year-old post as if it was made yesterday.

That's like running into a long-lost friend and starting a conversation where it last ended without even saying "Hi! How have you been all this time?"

I personally think that anyone who does that should have to wear a special avatar for a month - one titled "Grave-Digger".

[Fader_Berg]

Let me guess what happened. The guy was searching the forum for a specific topic. Ran across this thread and gave his five cents, not looking at the date of the latest post.

No big deal really...

[Capt. Morgan]

Should I add more?

[Fader_Berg]

Yes, but not in this thread in a couple of years.