SH5 (campaign) is so boring

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Magnum

Guys, I don't know what to do with this game anymore. Everything is sooooo boring, I find it really hard to play it anymore. Tried everything to spice it up a bit (mods, 100% realism, attacking Scapa on surface etc), but still... it gets more and more boring and hard to have fun with it.

Have you tried any of the mods available? If you want a more challenging harbour raiding experience, try one of the AI mods on offer. There are other mods that affect other aspects of gameplay too, so take a browse in the mods section and soon you'll be playing a different game.

[Placoderm]

Originally Posted by Nisgeis

Have you tried any of the mods available? If you want a more challenging harbour raiding experience, try one of the AI mods on offer. There are other mods that affect other aspects of gameplay too, so take a browse in the mods section and soon you'll be playing a different game.

Did you actually read his post?

Here, let me help you with the most pertinent part: ..."Tried everything to spice it up a bit (mods, 100% realism, attacking Scapa on surface etc),..."


I beleive he was also referring to the strict scripting of the supposed "Dynamic Campaign" that was adding to his frustration when he wrote: "I tried to find at least 1 target that can count for any of these missions"

I myself have also been frustrated with the very specific mission goals that border on the ridiculously absurd, and which out of necessity lead a player into ignoring perfectly legitimate targets that we would not have hesitated in shooting in previous renditions of SH...all so that we can hunt a very specific battleship or taskforce, in essence 'gaming' the 'game'.

Just last night I passed up a perfectly juicy convoy that I never before would have ignored (nor would any real u-boat captain in his right mind) because it was located a wee bit too close to the outside edge of my scripted patrol zone, and thus I most likely would have received no 'credit' for my efforts. In wartime (and in previous sims) I would have hunted that convoy down to the last ship or torpedo, knowing deep inside that the war materials I was depriving the enemy were more important than sinking another 'capitol ship'...but in this game (as gorgeous as it is) that taste of realism is deprived me.

I keep trying to like this game, but am more and more placed in the same position as the OP when it comes to the concessions made to realism for the sake of the 'game'.

[IanC]

Originally Posted by Placoderm

I beleive he was also referring to the strict scripting of the supposed "Dynamic Campaign" that was adding to his frustration when he wrote: "I tried to find at least 1 target that can count for any of these missions"

I myself have also been frustrated with the very specific mission goals that border on the ridiculously absurd, and which out of necessity lead a player into ignoring perfectly legitimate targets that we would not have hesitated in shooting in previous renditions of SH...all so that we can hunt a very specific battleship or taskforce, in essence 'gaming' the 'game'.

Just last night I passed up a perfectly juicy convoy that I never before would have ignored (nor would any real u-boat captain in his right mind) because it was located a wee bit too close to the outside edge of my scripted patrol zone, and thus I most likely would have received no 'credit' for my efforts. In wartime (and in previous sims) I would have hunted that convoy down to the last ship or torpedo, knowing deep inside that the war materials I was depriving the enemy were more important than sinking another 'capitol ship'...but in this game (as gorgeous as it is) that taste of realism is deprived me.

I keep trying to like this game, but am more and more placed in the same position as the OP when it comes to the concessions made to realism for the sake of the 'game'.

Ok now I understand what the OP was getting at. Wasn't sure if he found SH5 boring or submarine warfare in general. So it is the scripted nature of SH5 that is the problem.

I think this is actually a more interesting campaign than the 'Patrol ____ Grid for 24 hours' campaign style.

The only thing I would change (and would be a big addition, the biggest) is to make the war truly dynamic. I'd love to have all tonnage sunk be accumulated, and each month go towards speeding up events that were favorable to the Germans, or delaying events unfavorable to the Germans.

All of the 'ship specific' (sink a carrier, etc) objectives would not be mandatory, but would count significantly more towards the progress of the war than tonnage alone.

Ultimately the "war" inside the campaign might just turn out slightly differently if you are extremely successful. Nothing outside the scope of what difference one single uboat captain could have expected to make, but little changes in the timing of historical events that compound over the course of the campaign.

[Placoderm]

Originally Posted by IanC

Ok now I understand what the OP was getting at. Wasn't sure if he found SH5 boring or submarine warfare in general. So it is the scripted nature of SH5 that is the problem.

Actually, after reading his later post, it is I who may have been mistaken. I was under the impression that he was wanting a more historical challenge...but his later post about a more 'exciting' mission that I referred to in my later post made it pretty clear that it was the lack of scripted excitement and not the lack of historical accuracy that he was wanting.

In any case, I am so confused now that I am best to just slink off into the darkness and admit my own failure at comprehension, right or wrong or somewhere in-between.

[IanC]

Originally Posted by Placoderm

In any case, I am so confused now that I am best to just slink off into the darkness and admit my own failure at comprehension, right or wrong or somewhere in-between.

it's all good. The whole thread is a little confusing, including the title.

[Zedi]

Actually Placoderm had right. It's exactly I was talking about. Only difference is that I was talking not only by how boring is the campaign, but everything in the game, including the historical mission and MP. Maybe if the AI would be smarter, maybe if the crew would actually count on the ship management things would be different.

Speaking about the campaigns I also had to pass on many convoys only because I was short on amo and the mission objective was asking me to sink a certain type of ship. For example in the first campaign hunting the damn carrier in Atlantic I had to pass at least 3 huge convoys because I had only 5 torpedoes left. How painful can be this sight for a real sub captain:
- bdu, I have a large convoy on sight, can I get them?
- No, we dont have any interest in convoys in this war, we need only one carrier sunk. And make sure that carrier is right in the middle of Atlantic or you will be punished.

Later on, operation weserubung was my nightmare. Sunk tons of battleships in Scapa right before the invasion, still that was not count for the main mission. Had to search the damn battleship for more than 3 day to find it and be able to complete the mission and the campaign.

Another example, the Western approaches campaign. Tried to do the Winston's Special mission, so I set up my patrols near Freetown where those troop carriers should arrive. I engaged 3 convoys and also a group of 3 Dido's with no result on mission. Then I got bored of waiting so I vent up in north Atlantic to try the British Supplies mission. Guess what.. no convoys for days, all reports of convoys was out of the mission area.

So yes, this is the boring part I was talking about, the mission objectives. Go out and try to find the needle in the hay, nothing more or less. So that's why I was thinking about some other kind of missions, more dynamic and fun. Instead of going out in the middle of nowhere and try to find the only target that can count for the mission and pass everything else, how about set up some dynamic mission areas where anything can happen.

[robbo180265]

Originally Posted by Magnum

Actually Placoderm had right. It's exactly I was talking about. Only difference is that I was talking not only by how boring is the campaign, but everything in the game, including the historical mission and MP. Maybe if the AI would be smarter, maybe if the crew would actually count on the ship management things would be different.

Speaking about the campaigns I also had to pass on many convoys only because I was short on amo and the mission objective was asking me to sink a certain type of ship. For example in the first campaign hunting the damn carrier in Atlantic I had to pass at least 3 huge convoys because I had only 5 torpedoes left. How painful can be this sight for a real sub captain:
- bdu, I have a large convoy on sight, can I get them?
- No, we dont have any interest in convoys in this war, we need only one carrier sunk. And make sure that carrier is right in the middle of Atlantic or you will be punished.

Later on, operation weserubung was my nightmare. Sunk tons of battleships in Scapa right before the invasion, still that was not count for the main mission. Had to search the damn battleship for more than 3 day to find it and be able to complete the mission and the campaign.

Another example, the Western approaches campaign. Tried to do the Winston's Special mission, so I set up my patrols near Freetown where those troop carriers should arrive. I engaged 3 convoys and also a group of 3 Dido's with no result on mission. Then I got bored of waiting so I vent up in north Atlantic to try the British Supplies mission. Guess what.. no convoys for days, all reports of convoys was out of the mission area.

So yes, this is the boring part I was talking about, the mission objectives. Go out and try to find the needle in the hay, nothing more or less. So that's why I was thinking about some other kind of missions, more dynamic and fun. Instead of going out in the middle of nowhere and try to find the only target that can count for the mission and pass everything else, how about set up some dynamic mission areas where anything can happen.

I do see your point - trouble is the stuff you are finding boring, is the stuff I love.

You made some good suggestions, but to be honest - I wouldn't buy that game , really wouldn't appeal to me. I love the thrill of stalking a convoy.

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Placoderm

On the other hand, I did not point out "all the things in the game that I personally don't like", but simply the one that I thought he was referring to.

I was referring to this thread only, but yes I wasn't clear. I don't mean that all that you post is negative. There are a lot of threads being hijacked that should be on one topic, but somehow manage to get dragged off into a kick SH5 session.

Originally Posted by robbo180265

I wouldn't read too much into it matey - with all the drama lately we're all a little jumpy.

Oh yes.

Originally Posted by Magnum

Actually Placoderm had right. It's exactly I was talking about. Only difference is that I was talking not only by how boring is the campaign, but everything in the game, including the historical mission and MP. Maybe if the AI would be smarter, maybe if the crew would actually count on the ship management things would be different.

What does 'if the crew would actually count on the ship management' mean? If you were complaing about everything in the game, there's probably not much hope of a salvage of it for you, even with a patch and mods.

But, as you're complaining about the AI, but have you tried any of the AI mods? I know you said you had tried 'everything', but if you have tried one of the AI mods, then you should have noticed a difference.

[Placoderm]

Originally Posted by Magnum

Actually Placoderm had right. It's exactly I was talking about. Only difference is that I was talking not only by how boring is the campaign, but everything in the game, including the historical mission and MP. Maybe if the AI would be smarter, maybe if the crew would actually count on the ship management things would be different.

Speaking about the campaigns I also had to pass on many convoys only because I was short on amo and the mission objective was asking me to sink a certain type of ship. For example in the first campaign hunting the damn carrier in Atlantic I had to pass at least 3 huge convoys because I had only 5 torpedoes left. How painful can be this sight for a real sub captain:
- bdu, I have a large convoy on sight, can I get them?
- No, we dont have any interest in convoys in this war, we need only one carrier sunk. And make sure that carrier is right in the middle of Atlantic or you will be punished.

Later on, operation weserubung was my nightmare. Sunk tons of battleships in Scapa right before the invasion, still that was not count for the main mission. Had to search the damn battleship for more than 3 day to find it and be able to complete the mission and the campaign.

Another example, the Western approaches campaign. Tried to do the Winston's Special mission, so I set up my patrols near Freetown where those troop carriers should arrive. I engaged 3 convoys and also a group of 3 Dido's with no result on mission. Then I got bored of waiting so I vent up in north Atlantic to try the British Supplies mission. Guess what.. no convoys for days, all reports of convoys was out of the mission area.

So yes, this is the boring part I was talking about, the mission objectives. Go out and try to find the needle in the hay, nothing more or less. So that's why I was thinking about some other kind of missions, more dynamic and fun. Instead of going out in the middle of nowhere and try to find the only target that can count for the mission and pass everything else, how about set up some dynamic mission areas where anything can happen.

Well, at least I wasn't completely nuts in reading your first post. It is highly frustrating to me to have to save my eels for that one 'special target' whilst passing up perfectly good convoys...but with time and a few patches hopefully that will be fixed.

Ideally, what we really need is to have more user-made missions and campaigns...but that will take a while. I am trying to learn the mission editor, and hopefully someday Neal will have a dedicated Missions forum (unless there already is one that I haven't found yet) so that we can enjoy some more historically accurate mission designs. It took a while before RSRD (the 'Run Silent, Run Deep' campaign) was created for SH4, and that has literally transformed the game for me (although I still suck...at least I suck in a historical way).

I still long for a truly dynamic world and more historical objectives that are in line with what a U-boat commander might face...but that is probably still months in the future, at best.

The problem with scripting is that everything relies on triggers, and if you miss that one most important trigger, then nothing works as expected. To design a mission that continues to offer challenge even if you miss a critical trigger can be very hard to build...but it is possible (primarily by creating dozens of alternate triggers and/or a global trigger of sorts). I used to design campaigns for ARMA and the original OFP, so perhaps some of that will come in handy...but again, that will take time that I may not have right now...but someone might, given time.

In any case, there is some hope since we have the mission editor to play with. For that, I am very thankful!

[John Channing]

Originally Posted by Placoderm

Did you actually read his post?

Here, let me help you with the most pertinent part: ..."Tried everything to spice it up a bit (mods, 100% realism, attacking Scapa on surface etc),..."


I beleive he was also referring to the strict scripting of the supposed "Dynamic Campaign" that was adding to his frustration when he wrote: "I tried to find at least 1 target that can count for any of these missions"

I myself have also been frustrated with the very specific mission goals that border on the ridiculously absurd, and which out of necessity lead a player into ignoring perfectly legitimate targets that we would not have hesitated in shooting in previous renditions of SH...all so that we can hunt a very specific battleship or taskforce, in essence 'gaming' the 'game'.

Just last night I passed up a perfectly juicy convoy that I never before would have ignored (nor would any real u-boat captain in his right mind) because it was located a wee bit too close to the outside edge of my scripted patrol zone, and thus I most likely would have received no 'credit' for my efforts. In wartime (and in previous sims) I would have hunted that convoy down to the last ship or torpedo, knowing deep inside that the war materials I was depriving the enemy were more important than sinking another 'capitol ship'...but in this game (as gorgeous as it is) that taste of realism is deprived me.

I keep trying to like this game, but am more and more placed in the same position as the OP when it comes to the concessions made to realism for the sake of the 'game'.

You are aware that you don't have to complete your objectives, aren't you? You can do what you want, go where you want and sink what you want and the campaign will roll along regardless. It will just play out differently than it would if you completed some, or all, of your objectives.

You cannot hope to win a war without completing the objectives laid out by HQ because you are not in posession of all of the information that they are. However, sucessful captains were rarely shot for not completing theirs.

JCC

[Placoderm]

Originally Posted by John Channing

You are aware that you don't have to complete your objectives, aren't you? You can do what you want, go where you want and sink what you want and the campaign will roll along regardless. It will just play out differently than it would if you completed some, or all, of your objectives.

You cannot hope to win a war without completing the objectives laid out by HQ because you are not in posession of all of the information that they are. However, sucessful captains were rarely shot for not completing theirs.

JCC

Actually, John, I did not know that. I was under the impression that I needed to fulfill those scripted tasks in order to progress in the campaign, or at least earn the renown to upgrade my sub and crew.

I do appreciate your clearing that up for me. Unfortunately, I do not recall any of the being coverd in the horribly short manual, so I thank you.



Of course, now I have to sit here and realize that I let a perfectly gorgeous convoy get away...or more specifically, I ran away from it to avoid detection.

[Capt_Sluggo]

Nope, it's not for everyone. You have to like the long hunt. For me, that's the real fun.

I got lazy and stayed on the surface charging batteries for several hours straight, not bothering to dive and check hydrophone. During a nasty storm, high seas, wind, rain, low visibility and a long long way from any land. I had just clicked off time compression and gone topside when a task force came charging in at 20+ knots and almost ran me down. Scared me but good! A screen shot would have been fantastic but there was no time to even think.

Rare moments like that are enough to keep me playing.

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Placoderm

Did you actually read his post?

Here, let me help you with the most pertinent part: ..."Tried everything to spice it up a bit (mods, 100% realism, attacking Scapa on surface etc),..."

Yes, I did read the actually read his post. I'm just trying to help the guy out, so please don't be so negative about it, like I did something bad.

If he has tried all of the mods and still finds that attacking in Scapa Flow on the surface has not been 'spiced up' then, either, he hasn't tried all the mods or he hasn't installed all the mods properly. So, I was trying to be helpful.

If I were to read and take his post as literal then:

So how you guys manage to have fun with this game? Share some tips, anything that can spice up a bit this game.

Wouldn't make any sense would it? I mean, if he has literally tried everything, then what could we possibly suggest, other than to try something again. So, I took it that he hadn't really tried everything, or every mod and was trying to point him in the right direction, but I suppose a thread like this couldn't last five minutes without some negative outpouring at some point.

I see you have managed to respond to a thread asking 'how do I make this game more exciting' with a post pointing out all the things in the game that you personally don't like, but not one single positive suggestion. This forums isn't just about what you don't like about the game, it's about trying to help others out as well, if you can.

[Placoderm]

Originally Posted by Nisgeis

Yes, I did read the actually read his post. I'm just trying to help the guy out, so please don't be so negative about it, like I did something bad.

If he has tried all of the mods and still finds that attacking in Scapa Flow on the surface has not been 'spiced up' then, either, he hasn't tried all the mods or he hasn't installed all the mods properly. So, I was trying to be helpful.

If I were to read and take his post as literal then:

Wouldn't make any sense would it? I mean, if he has literally tried everything, then what could we possibly suggest, other than to try something again. So, I took it that he hadn't really tried everything, or every mod and was trying to point him in the right direction, but I suppose a thread like this couldn't last five minutes without some negative outpouring at some point.

I see you have managed to respond to a thread asking 'how do I make this game more exciting' with a post pointing out all the things in the game that you personally don't like, but not one single positive suggestion. This forums isn't just about what you don't like about the game, it's about trying to help others out as well, if you can.

A stated above, I do concede that I, too, misread his post Nisgeis, in that I had assumed that he was looking for a more realistic combat experience. Having myself just passed up that juicy convoy late last night due to it being in the 'wrong place'...I was reading my own interpretation into his words, and for that I apologize.

On the other hand, I did not point out "all the things in the game that I personally don't like", but simply the one that I thought he was referring to. Again, that was my mistake in interpreting his original posts' 5th sentence as being frustrated with the scripting. Obviously, I was wrong in that belief.

Where we differ is in your feeling that all that I post is negativity when you say "This forums isn't just about what you don't like about the game, it's about trying to help others out as well, if you can". Apparently unknown to you, I have posted help whenever I can both recently as well as in years past with SH3&4, and have supported the genre in many ways that you do not know, although in it's current state I cannot help but also highlight the failings when I feel it is relevant to the conversation and the future of the series. Sometimes I might be right, and sometimes I will be dead wrong...but that does not preclude me from participation. The attitude that it does shall do more damage to this forum than any remarks about SH5's numerous failings ever will.