RuB 1.45 - Why are single ship contacts back?

Well, if you go back and read other posts you'll find that I'm not alone.

[quote=Magua]

Originally Posted by runyan99

Then please, find me an example of a U-boat using this information to sink a lone merchant. It should be easy.

I don't think you'll find many.

The single ship contact information in SHIII is a game invention by the designers to increase the action for the player, and to avoid long fruitless patrols.

You're twisting historical reality to conform to SHIII.

U-boats were not able to use radio intercepts to reliably locate and sink merchant vessels. Far and away most of the single ship contacts were chance encounters detected by the eyeball of the watchmen.

P.S. What pages are you referring to in Clay Blair? I'll re-read it.

I think this person's post really states it the best. Especially the "twisting historical reality" statement.

And to expand on that, I think by including single contacts on the navigation map in a mod and then making it seem as if it was the norm during the war, really does a dis service to History.

[CWorth]

[quote=Magua]

Originally Posted by Magua

I think this person's post really states it the best. Especially the "twisting historical reality" statement.

And to expand on that, I think by including single contacts on the navigation map in a mod and then making it seem as if it was the norm during the war, really does a dis service to History.

What you cant seem to understand is this is a GAME..Not a history lesson.We have said it already numerous times..you dont like it change it or dont play it.Now you have the instructions on how to do it.So do it already and stop whining about it.

As has been also stated numerous times..the contacts were put in to give people a way to play without having to rely on constant non evenful patrols.Many like this others do not.Its all personal preferences..and you have no right to say that your way is the only way it should be.The difference here is the ones who like no contacts have either modded it themselves or found something else that does what they want..where you want to do nothing but bitch about it..but not actually do anything about it.

[quote=CWorth]

Originally Posted by Magua

..the contacts were put in to give people a way to play without having to rely on constant non evenful patrols..

Well there ya go! You finally came around and agreed with me that those contacts are not Historically Accurate, just a "gaming" thing! My point exactly!

[JScones]

Originally Posted by Magua

And to expand on that, I think by including single contacts on the navigation map in a mod and then making it seem as if it was the norm during the war, really does a dis service to History.

Yes, I believe you may have said this once or twice, or even three times.

You have RUb, you have NYGM, you have Ducimus' explanation, you have your own ability to mod the game (well, maybe not?), you've expressed your opinion countless times, now just move on and play your game...sorry historical simulation. Stop, as CWorth so well put it, giving everyone an historical lesson. Believe it or not, not everyone here shares your view (some just want to play an enjoyable game). Just accept that and stop spamming and trolling every thread you come by.

Geez, you just don't take a hint do you?

Originally Posted by JScones

Yes, I believe you may have said this once or twice, or even three times.

You have RUb, you have NYGM, you have Ducimus' explanation, you have your own ability to mod the game (well, maybe not?), you've expressed your opinion countless times, now just move on and play your game...sorry historical simulation. Stop, as CWorth so well put it, giving everyone an historical lesson. Believe it or not, not everyone here shares your view (some just want to play an enjoyable game). Just accept that and stop spamming and trolling every thread you come by.

Geez, you just don't take a hint do you?

I just find it odd that everytime I express a View that someone does not agree with, then it becomes "trolling", "instigating", etc...... Are free thinking views not allowed on the Forum. Have I entered North Korea?

And as far as I understand as long as it does not conflict with the Subsim Acceptable use Policy, then I am free to make posts as I please. I have not used profanity or deragotory comments as others have done, which does conflict with the AUP.

[JScones]

See, here's the thing.

You've expressed your view COUNTLESS TIMES on about 4 or 5 threads in at least two different forums (although you did apparently post your "final thoughts" on the subject back on 4 July). I'm not arguing with your viewpoint - never have. If that's what you want to believe, then no skin off my nose. I'm disagreeing with your attitude. Totally different thing.

See, you've been given solutions, hell, you even know what the solutions are, to make the game (simulation, or whatever you want to call it) the way YOU want to play it.

So why keep *ramming* your views of reality onto everyone else at every opportunity? You have given a strong perception that you don't care what other people think anyway, as you know it all. So why bother continually repeating your point baiting people to argue with you (especially when you wrote yesterday in another thread in the SHIV forum that you weren't going to debate your view)?

Here's a perfect example of the baiting to which I refer... http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...450#post279450 I note your last response is after the one where you said you were not going to debate it. A perfect example of where you do not want to respect someone else's viewpoint and simply want to engage in an argument to ram home yours.

This thread is another good example - you've rehashed a thread where the last post was seven months ago, and added no new value to it at all - just another bait to get someone's attention, perhaps because the last thread was locked?

Enough is enough already. Move on to your next beef with SH3 and let's start on it.

[CWorth]

Originally Posted by Magua

Well there ya go! You finally came around and agreed with me that those contacts are not Historically Accurate, just a "gaming" thing! My point exactly!

I am not agreeing or disagreeing one way or the other.Just stating a fact about the game engine.

I really could not care a less how someone wants to play their game or whether a particular thing is accurate or not.Thats all up to the interpretation of fatcs and evidence by each individual.

What I was arguing was your handling of the whole thing.
People were doing everything they could to help by giving their interpretations of what they know about the Uboat war based on what info and sources/books they might have.And you just kept repeatingthe same thing over and over and just seemed to be arguing for the sake of arguing.
You seem to take anything you read as the gospel from your books.That alone is a big mistake.I would say that most books are nothing more than the authors interpretations of the facts that they had at the time of the writing of the book.All of history is up for interpretation..especially after so many years have passed and memories begin to fade and other stuff is lost to time.
I always live by the saying.."Never believe anything you hear and only half of what you read".
What it all comes down to with "facts" is lets say you take 5 books.Now all these books are on the same subject.However all of the have slightly differing views or facts of what they are trying to explain.So you have to take what you read in all of them combine it all together and try to find a point somewhere in the middle and that middle will usually be closer to the truth then any one of those books alone is conveying.Everything in life is based on interpretation of events..so is history and the books on the subjects .

Originally Posted by CWorth

I am not agreeing or disagreeing one way or the other.Just stating a fact about the game engine.

I really could not care a less how someone wants to play their game or whether a particular thing is accurate or not.Thats all up to the interpretation of fatcs and evidence by each individual.

What I was arguing was your handling of the whole thing.
People were doing everything they could to help by giving their interpretations of what they know about the Uboat war based on what info and sources/books they might have.And you just kept repeatingthe same thing over and over and just seemed to be arguing for the sake of arguing.
You seem to take anything you read as the gospel from your books.That alone is a big mistake.I would say that most books are nothing more than the authors interpretations of the facts that they had at the time of the writing of the book.All of history is up for interpretation..especially after so many years have passed and memories begin to fade and other stuff is lost to time.
I always live by the saying.."Never believe anything you hear and only half of what you read".
What it all comes down to with "facts" is lets say you take 5 books.Now all these books are on the same subject.However all of the have slightly differing views or facts of what they are trying to explain.So you have to take what you read in all of them combine it all together and try to find a point somewhere in the middle and that middle will usually be closer to the truth then any one of those books alone is conveying.Everything in life is based on interpretation of events..so is history and the books on the subjects .

Okay, so you disbelieve what is documented, and come up with your own conclusions to write your own History to fit what you think should be correct...???

Authors of History Works do not just sit around and interpret. They base their interpretations on primary sources and interviews with those who were there.

[quote=CWorth]

Originally Posted by Magua

What you cant seem to understand is this is a GAME..Not a history lesson.

Well, CW I think you will find that most people got into this game because they have an interest in the Time Period. The Majority of the Subsim Forums and SHIII Forums deal with Historical Topics. More than likely most players were big WWII Buffs before SHIII was even thought of. So many players want it to be as Historically Accurate as possible.

There is even a WaW where players experience a "living history" type atmosphere.

So I would disagree (not trolling or baiting) with your inference that History plays no part in the game.

Originally Posted by JScones

See, here's the thing.

You've expressed your view COUNTLESS TIMES on about 4 or 5 threads in at least two different forums (although you did apparently post your "final thoughts" on the subject back on 4 July). I'm not arguing with your viewpoint - never have. If that's what you want to believe, then no skin off my nose. I'm disagreeing with your attitude. Totally different thing.

See, you've been given solutions, hell, you even know what the solutions are, to make the game (simulation, or whatever you want to call it) the way YOU want to play it.

So why keep *ramming* your views of reality onto everyone else at every opportunity? You have given a strong perception that you don't care what other people think anyway, as you know it all. So why bother continually repeating your point baiting people to argue with you (especially when you wrote yesterday in another thread in the SHIV forum that you weren't going to debate your view)?

Here's a perfect example of the baiting to which I refer... http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...450#post279450 I note your last response is after the one where you said you were not going to debate it. A perfect example of where you do not want to respect someone else's viewpoint and simply want to engage in an argument to ram home yours.

This thread is another good example - you've rehashed a thread where the last post was seven months ago, and added no new value to it at all - just another bait to get someone's attention, perhaps because the last thread was locked?

Enough is enough already. Move on to your next beef with SH3 and let's start on it.

I'm not aware of any limits on how many times a topic can be discussed. As long as I am not profane, insulting, or deragatory (as others have been) I believe I can post on this subject.

[bigboywooly]

@ Magua

Noone is saying you cant mention a topic more than once
What everyone disagrees with is your continual sniping
If you are so annoyed at historical inaccuracies then go away and make your own mod
Until then you can use the information given to remove the single ship contacs and stop being so negative about other peoples work
GW has had over 10,000 downloads - do you think every one of those has agreed with everything done or not changed their installation to suit their own needs
Even NYGM users have changed their mod to suit individual tastes and no doubt the same can be said about every major mod made
I know I have changed a few things and added things to suit my own needs
A simple question on how to remove single contacts was all you needed to post instead of the continual sniping
Every single mod is better than the stock game and be thankful people spend the time making them

Magua understands that some members are a dog to the Single Ship Contact debate. When it appears on the Forum they put down their Tomahawk to feed their laziness.:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[CWorth]

Lets see what Neal thinks...you've just been reported to him as an instigator and trouble maker and this last post is a direct attack on members here which is against forum rules.Lets see what he thinks.Im through with dealing with you..let the mods and admin have a go now.

I suggest that everone else simply ignore him and do the same..let the admins and moderators deal with him.

[Ducimus]