I'm concerned about game ballance on the American side of things.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by VipertheSniper

I only hope it's not as frustrating, albeit realistic, as with SH1, where dud's and premature detonations were very much the rule with the dud torpedo setting on.

I hope it is that realistic and frustrating, but only at the highest levels. Of course it should be an option.

[Camaero]

I would love it (although in a very frustrating way) if I could come back from patrols with 0 ships sunk due to faulty torps.

[joea]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I hope it is that realistic and frustrating, but only at the highest levels. Of course it should be an option.

Exactly, it MUST be an option, and thus no need to "dumb" it down if the option is on.

[VipertheSniper]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I hope it is that realistic and frustrating, but only at the highest levels. Of course it should be an option.

That would only be the case if we didn't know how to counter the problems with the torpedoes in early war.

I've once played the whole campaign in SH1 with everything on full realism, but it's just not the same having all the knowledge the skippers didn't have as to why their torps didn't hit, failed to explode or exploded prematurely. Sure one can pretend to not have the knowledge, but I'm sure it'll only take 1 mission to make you use your knowledge tho.

[hyperion2206]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I hope it is that realistic and frustrating, but only at the highest levels. Of course it should be an option.

I don't think that they will include such an option, I wouldn't. I think that even the people who like to play with 100% realism would get quite annoyed if 90% of their torpedoes would be duds. I know that some of us would like to have that, but they're too few. Just my 2 cents.

[Sailor Steve]

Not me...I'm good at pretending.:p :rotfl:

No offence or argument intended; I really do like having those options, and I'm frustrated that SHIII made it too easy in the early war.

[Morts]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I'm good at pretending.:p :rotfl:

hahahaha:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Barkhorn1x]

Options are good.

Just make it an option and if you don't like it then don't use it.

Barkhorn.

[difool2]

Originally Posted by Camaero

I would love it (although in a very frustrating way) if I could come back from patrols with 0 ships sunk due to faulty torps.

...only to get a warning from ComSubPac that you aren't sinking enough ships. Got
that once in SH1 after plugging 10 torps (about half duds) into the side of a Yamato
class BB and not sinking her. Hmm enemy's biggest boat laid up in drydock for 6+
months, and that's a bad thing?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by difool2

...only to get a warning from ComSubPac that you aren't sinking enough ships. Got
that once in SH1 after plugging 10 torps (about half duds) into the side of a Yamato
class BB and not sinking her. Hmm enemy's biggest boat laid up in drydock for 6+
months, and that's a bad thing?

1) Our intelligence from Japan is very poor; we have no proof of what you claim.

2) Be more agressive!
:rotfl:

[Aimbot]

I just realized something else. The Gato is HUGE. I think it's about 50 feet longer than the IX. Are there any classes more in line with the VII.

[Barkhorn1x]

Originally Posted by Aimbot

I just realized something else. The Gato is HUGE. I think it's about 50 feet longer than the IX. Are there any classes more in line with the VII.

Not in the US Navy my friend.




Barkhorn.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Barkhorn1x

Not in the US Navy my friend.


Barkhorn.

Aye! If you're gonna be crossing half the Pacific to get to a patrol area, you're gonna want that extra fifty feet. It contains two more diesel engines and a lot of extra fuel.

[Aimbot]

Jesus, I know we like things big, but 300 feet is pushing it.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Aimbot

Jesus, I know we like things big, but 300 feet is pushing it.

About par for the course for the Pacific. The contemporary Japanese fleet subs were as big, if not bigger.