Overview of Realism settings

[_Seth_]

Sounds good, mate! Lookin' forward to see those new ones! ...

[raduz]

Originally Posted by melnibonian

your hydrophones cannot ditect a convoy 1000 miles away as in the stock game.

what exactly do you mean by this? AFAIK, if you (not your SO) man the hydrophone in the game, you can detect a ship or a convoy at 34km. on the contrary, i think that the game underestimate the capacity of the hydrophone, because in reality, the sonarmen were capable to detect a convoy even at 50-100 km. why do you think the game hydrophone range is unreal and too large?

Originally Posted by WhiteW0lf

How old are you? You seem to not understand these settings much at all but to complain about each of them, I am not even going to go into fixing each of your points in every setting that was grossly incorrect.

#1) "How old are you?" was not only rude, but unecessary.

#2) IMO sounds like he understands the realism settings just fine.

#3) Again, IMO, I'd think you'd spend a grand total of, oh, zero seconds 'fixing' things, as I don't see anything incorrect, let alone grossly incorrect, in his explanations.

[melnibonian]

Originally Posted by raduz

what exactly do you mean by this? AFAIK, if you (not your SO) man the hydrophone in the game, you can detect a ship or a convoy at 34km. on the contrary, i think that the game underestimate the capacity of the hydrophone, because in reality, the sonarmen were capable to detect a convoy even at 50-100 km. why do you think the game hydrophone range is unreal and too large?

The 1000 miles away was ment to indicate that in GWX the U-Boat sencors are a bit more realistic and pick up signals in normal distances (up to 50km in favourable conditions I think). In the stock game the hydrophones were always 'perfect' in their detection, something which is unrealistic, as in reality they were missing their targets quite a few times.

[raduz]

oh i see, the precision will be reduced, not the detection range... you should write it like that at the beginning

[Melonfish]

Weapon officer assistance/Manual aiming- Funny thing about these two is you can have one on and one off and get virtually the same benefit while having a slightly higher realism %. Not very practical, but there are a few benefits- by having manual off but weapon officer on, you can 'train' yourself to fire manual solutions; if the firing solution is iffy you can have the weapon officer plot the solution, otherwise, go it manually. Another thing novice players should know is that while 'auto' mode is theoretically easier to set a firing solution, it is by no means a guaranteed hit. Often times setting up a auto shot that has a good chance of hitting isn't much harder to do manually, also.

Right, so if i turn auto aiming off and weapon officer assist on i can learn how to launch my own torps right? yet if i'm really stuck i just bug the officer for a solution.

my realism settings have been creeping skyward as i've played this game and i think this may help the final transition to almost 100%!! (though i'll be keeping the external view cause thats kewl)
pete

[Corsair]

This is how I did it to go to 100% manual operations. I had the WO just in case things went wrong somewhere, then I used it less then I don't use it at all anymore. It was just moral comfort I guess...

[melnibonian]

Originally Posted by raduz

oh i see, the precision will be reduced, not the detection range... you should write it like that at the beginning

Point taken

[dcb]

There is another realism option I didn't see debated here and which is bugging me for a long time: the stabilized periscope view. I was unable to find info about how affected by waves is a sub at P-depth. Do you think the heavy vertical rocking in SH3 is realistic?

[irish1958]

dcb,
You bring up a good point. In heavy seas, with the boat broaching the surface and sinking to 15 meters, and this option on, the periscope is useless. I suspect this is how it was.
Could submarines launch torpedos in heavy seas with 5 meter waves and 15ms winds??

[Sailor Steve]

"We rode some pretty massive North Atlantic storms which were really impressive.Nobody could see, move, aim or do anything. And then there were those occasions when you suddenly saw a single ship which would just steer a parallel course. You couldn't harm each other. Everybody thought of their own survival during those heavy seas. Nothing else mattered."
-Horst Elfe, officer on U-99 before commanding U-139 and U-93

When I'm in a heavy storm I write in my log that it's too rough to shoot torpedoes.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by dcb

There is another realism option I didn't see debated here and which is bugging me for a long time: the stabilized periscope view. I was unable to find info about how affected by waves is a sub at P-depth. Do you think the heavy vertical rocking in SH3 is realistic?

I think GWX addresses this issue with the u-boat reacting as closely as the real thing in heavy seas. We will have to wait and see.

I have stated many times before, this game requires a lot of imagination. I believe the realism settings are pretty good as they are. I do not understand why you would want to turn off the weapons officer. I use weapons officer assist. After all, that is what he is there for. Other than that, the GW mod has made the game all that much better irregardless of the settings options for realism. I believe GWX will only take it that much further.

[danlisa]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I believe GWX will only take it that much further.

Further & Beyond

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by danlisa

Further & Beyond

I rest my case fellas!!!!!