SH4 like backwards

[hyperion2206]

I don't get it Wave Skipper, if the game doesn't model torpedo failure or "the lousy command system" the game isn't realistic enough for you, but if the game is what you call "realistic" then it's too boring?
You want to play a Japanese commander with subs that only went down to 30 meters like RO-class subs? With a doctrine that does not allow you to sink merchants and therefore waiting for a warship to cross your path? That's what I would call a dull game.

[TDK1044]

SH4 is a game to be played by anyone over the age of 7....not a thesis on American submarine warefare in WWII. It's meant to be enjoyed as a game which places the player in a US sub in the Pacific between 1941 and 1945.

There will be a reasonable level of historical accuracy surrounding all aspects of the game, but it's just a game.

[Barkhorn1x]

If a sub sim was EXTREMLY accurate - no one would play. Read the book "Take Her Deep". If memory serves the Halibut went on 9 war patrols and came up empty on about 3 of them and w/ very little on 4 others.

In sim terms - that would add up to a lot of cruising and a lot of Zzzzzz!

To me, a good sim reflects history - but takes out most of the boring stuff.

Barkhorn.

claiming I was dishonoring the memory of American Sub skippers.

"I don't get it Wave Skipper, if the game doesn't model torpedo failure or "the lousy command system" the game isn't realistic enough for you, but if the game is what you call "realistic" then it's too boring"

Well, I will attempt to restate it in simple terms:

What is more exciting in realistic historical terms? (A) A game about a real sub force (USA) that spent 2 years with a low kill ratio and a terrible battle formula and plan (or lack there of), going up against a real ASW force that was underfunded (Japanese escorts), that did not have radar early and did not use it much when it finally got it, that had dinky depth charges and that set these to detonate too shallow, and that never dropped more than a handful of DCs before breaking off attacks (until about 43) and in short acted like the "novice" escorts in SH3 that everyone thought were so dull - a pathetic force that never used hunter-killer groups with small carriers to find subs.

OR

(B) A game about a real sub force that had an agressive view of sub warfare (Japanese) mainly aiming at warships - even entering harbors (Pearl) years before an American sub skipper would even dare to enter a Japanese harbor; A Japanese force that faced many challenging obstacles, that also had powerful torpedoes that worked, going up against a real ASW force that had learned many valuable lessons in the Atlantic (The Americans), that had radar early and used it, that spent lots of money on its escort force and that had large depth charges, and set them deep, that used carrier planes to hunt for subs and that had escorts that in a game should be set quickly to "expert", and a force that understood the concept of hunter-killer groups.

In other words, the Japanese never did ASW well. So in real life it was not a real challenge. The Americans took nearly 2.5 to 3 years to begin doing sub attacks well and waited over 2 years to solve their torpedo problem. They began the war with no real plan, and ended up trying everything depending on the whims of its messed up command structure.

A fun game that is REAL TO LIFE is one where the two sides are assinged to the roles that they did best. The Japanese sub force was not up to German standards, but it began the war with a better sub force and coherent submarine plan than the Americans. So a fun REALISTIC Pacific war game should have chosen the Japanese. The Americans, while slow to figure out submarine warfare, was already well versed about ASW from both WWI and early WWII convoys and also had some of the best ASW ships ever built. So a fun realistic Pacific game should have picked the Americans to fill the role for ASW.

So DUH, ()......what would make the better game in real historical terms?????

Now SH4 will likely PLAY fun but it will not be very historical.

Now compare SH3. Everyone in the 20th century viewed the German U-boat force as one of the best submarine forces for the first half of that century. I was watching a show about an American who had built a glass domed sub in Britain, and he wanted to connect it to WWII submarines. So what did he do? He went and found a German U-boat man to ride in it, NOT an American, not a Brit, not a Frenchman. Why? Cause the truth is the Germans were the first nation to really take submarines to their ultimate ability and real war role. And this had been done in 1914-1918!!!!! The other powers did not, for they concentrated too much on surface fleets.

Now think escorts and 20th century and what comes to mind? Brit ships in WWI and WWII? Americans? Yeah, why? Cause they did that well! So SH3 was a great fun game for guys, cause boys and men love CHALLENGE - difficulty,, and SH3 scenarios were near to real history (except for a lack of wolfpacks). It was a no brainer.

SH4 will be a fun non-historical game - that once modded to the MAX may become either a dull realistic game, or a fun realistic game depending on how its modded (dull for the first two years if made realistic with American subs or fun for the first 3 years if remade as Japanese subs). The point is SH3 was both fun and realistic out of the box.

Ubi picked an Amercian sub force becuase it was part of 90s gaming traditions, not based on realism (which no one expected in the 90s) and it will sell well to Europe and the USA. Japanese programmers could make the right game and should, but won't because their country is afraid of offending their trading partners and Asia.

I think that war is SO LAST CENTURY its time for the Germans and Japanese to stop ignoring their real WWII history and embrace it.

[hyperion2206]

On december 7th Japanese MIDGET subs tried to enter Peral Harbor, but they didn't do any damage and they didn't survive either.
Japanese sub captains might have been dedicated but not very successful. They sunk 2 carriers (USS Wasp, USS Indianapolis) and perhaps some destroyers. The rest of the war they were hunted and didn't achieve much.
To create a game where you cruise the ocean to sink a BB or CV and hope not to be sunk by an escort with radar isn't fun at all.
I agree with you that the German U-Boats were the best until the allies had radar, but the Americans were still better than the Japanese. The first 21 month were a mess, but then they did have a working command system, good torpedos, young and dedicated sub skippers. But what did the Japanese have? Lousy subs (they couldn't even reproduce German subs because they lacked the technology), captains that believed that attacking merchants was dishonorable, crappy radar (even the Germans managed to get radar to work) and an high command that behaved as if they were still samurais.

and I already stated elsewhere on this forum that I believe the game will be more or less historical and fun beginning around early to mid 43 clear until 45. I know the Japanese did not do all that well, but not because 70% of their impact torpedo attacks were duds or because nearly 90% of their magnetic attacks were duds.

If you think about it - what would be worse in real hsitorical terms - trying to chase war ships that will have deadly easorts and getting depth charged deep? Or going up against thin screens of Japanese escorts and getting depth charged 100 feet too shallow? In SH3 I like the heavy challenge of deadly escorts and planes. I know SH4 will set the DC attacks deep (unrealistic) and MAY make them too powerful. On the other hand it is true that the Japanese sub force ended the war doing little more than transport.

I think the truth is we need to ask the Devs to give us some Japanese models to include in the patches, so that we can work Japanese subs into the mix. I know they had fundings and time issues, but the best idea would have been to include both sides.

Let's face it SH4 is SH3 but with new models and new seas. It will likely play like SH3 and rather than have the goofy US command structure we will feel like we are in new U-boats dealing with BdU. We will be U-boat captains in our own tactics (not the Devs fault) and the Japanese escorts will feel and act like Allied DDs.

It will also be new fodder for the modder's. So it will be good.

[TDK1044]

Hi WAVE SKIPPER,

I respect your views, but the only reason Ubisoft developed Silent Hunter 4 at all is to make money by selling an entertaining game where the player is a submarine Captain in a US sub in the Pacific between 1941 to 1945. Historical accuray will be taken into account, but it certainly won't be the only factor involved.

Members of Forums such as this total less than 3 percent of total sales based on the SH3 figures, and most of the other 97 percent wouldn't know the difference between a U Boat and a US sub if you took the identifying markings off the subs.

That doesn't mean that you don't strive for accuracy, it just means that there is a balance to strike.

Games are made for a wide range of people and to make money. Obviously the average world consumer does not want to play realistic sims.

My views are not my views. They are just history:

http://www.lookoutnewspaper.com/arch...060619/4.shtml

"Despit was beside himself with anger; the tanker, although damaged, was still seaworthy. The Japanese tanker had survived 11 MK 14 torpedoes fired from the Tinosa.
The Department of Ordinance conducted more tests and discovered the MK 14 torpedo had defective firing pins, hence no explosion on contact. Once these pins were replaced, the MK 14 torpedoes became the deadly armament they were intended to be. (my note: but not in magnetic attacks)
Nearly two years after Pearl Harbor, with torpedo troubles behind them, U.S. submarines in the Pacific began to take a deadly toll of Japanese shipping. But just as American submarines had improved, so had Japanese sub attack vessels. Submarines could now be subjected to relentless depth charge attacks"

i.e. the war really starts for subs in 43...

its just history.

I spent most of the last year either making SH3 mods or away from such games. But as SH4 gets ever nearer I thought I should begin to reread old books I had read and read some new ones - to see what amount of modding will be required to make the game truly ready for historical buffs. Just like modders wanted realistic smoke from burning oil, realistic harbor life, sub nets, mines, better convoy traffic, sub skins, and a host of other mods too numerous to name. A few quacks accused modders of wasting their time and treating SH3 badly. Not many, but such goof balls exist everywhere. I know the history buffs will want to move SH4 toward realistic parameters too. It will be a mess at first, but after half a year the game should start fleshing out.

I plan to even make another V-Mod add on: if the Germans win their side of the war, I will see to it that the Japanese win in the Pacific. If possible - if I can mod a Japanese sub force. I mean obviously I like fiction too. And I will try my hand at fiction after I tire of playing the Americans - from 43 on.

[TDK1044]

I admire your commitment to historical accuracy, and it's great that modders like yourself are around.

A little off point, but when I played SH3 at 100 percent realism, I found it challenging but less entertaining than playing at around 70 percent realism. Therefore, for me anyway, I'm happy to discard some level of realism in order to enjoy the game more. I accept that others would have a very different view and I respect that.

[AJ!]

im 50/50 on this one. I do love realism in a WW game but i also value gameplay just as much. I think SH3 had a great balance of gameplay and historical accuracy. Plus the realism option made the game alot more flexible to the history buffs and the casual players

[Finback]

There has been some mention in these posts which "seem" to indicate the American submariners had it easy. Yes the losses they incurred were less than the Germans or Japanese sub forces suffered. But leat's not forget this...

20% of American WWII submariners are still on patrol. This was the highest mortality rate of branch of the service.

Japanese ASW was not up to snuff with that of the Allies. By-and-large, this is true. But when they were sweating out a prolonged dc attack by one of the exceptions (and the Japanese had some very dedicated ASW units as the war progressed), the submariners on the receiving end of the attack weren't thinking about how "easy" they had it.

War is hell and the sub vets of any nationality know why.