No more GPS

[CNA0]

Agreeing a 100%, we need a set of improuved tools to draw the intended track, to add time, speed, DR and observed fixes, and so on.
Why the pencil can only draw a cross? why not a circled cross, half a circle, and some other marks? Is it a difficult task?
A sextant on the bridge (and at scope station) not only to get a star altitude; also to measure an horizontal angle on the land.
A mark from UZO or the scope at Capt. requirement as stated in http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=156347.
and so on.
The SH2 capability to get the lat-Long coordinates of a point (or to mark a point given the lat-Long coordinates) and the great circle path from a departure point to an arriving point.
And an easy mode to draw landmarks (mountain peaks, lihthouses, and so on) on the maps.
For the attack plot, we already have http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158098

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by CNA0

Agreeing a 100%, we need a set of improuved tools to draw the intended track, to add time, speed, DR and observed fixes, and so on.
Why the pencil can only draw a cross? why not a circled cross, half a circle, and some other marks? Is it a difficult task?
A sextant on the bridge (and at scope station) not only to get a star altitude; also to measure an horizontal angle on the land.

This has all been discussed many times before. I don't say it shouldn't be discussed again - it should. I just wanted to point out that there should also be an 'in-between' option.

1) Hard ('Realsitic'): Full navigation requiring sextant and compass, just as in real life.

2) Medium (My 'In-between'): The sub is shown on the map, and navigation is left up to the 'Navigator', but reliability depends on his skill level and whether stars, sun and land are visible for shooting, with the possibility of the sub marker being more and more off course the longer you go without a sighting.

3) Easy: Pretty much what we have now, optional for those who don't want to worry about it.

[karamazovnew]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

1) Hard ('Realsitic'): Full navigation requiring sextant and compass, just as in real life.

Realistic navigation doesn't imply just a sextant and the crew keeping a fixed course. To go from one point on the globe (A Latitude and B Longitude) to another (C Longitude and D Longitude) requires spherical trigonometry, not only to find the course you need to take (and update) but also the length of the trip. While this can be a LOT of fun in a game, it does require 2 things:
1. Spherical World with real regional maps and perfect ground mesh
2. Tools and order system for the crew.

Unfortunately Ubisoft has already stated that:

We investigated other projections as well, using a globe or specific maps of several locations (like they did in reality) but the drawbacks in terms of usability, freedom and understanding were too big to consider them further. Also, there is a number of technical problems associated to other geographical projections, which we chose not to tackle for now.

This was a huge mistake, because SH5 would've been the first naval game to allow real navigation which, combined with currents and tides would've been in itself is more challenging and rewarding than simply sinking ships. Plus it would've given the attack map a reason to exist, because of it's simplicity due to the small distances traveled during an attack.

The number 2 option is the best we can hope for, but just in case they give us a sextant and allow us to play with it, I want to point that just a minor change needs to be made to the map for it to work and turn number 2 into a pseudo number 1. There should be 3 types of sub markers that you (or the navigator) should place on the map:
1. Current "accurate" position of the sub. Available when you use the sextant or when the navigator can use it. If you ask him to place it on the map it should take a few minutes for him to do it. If you ask for a course change, the course should start from this position.
2. As the sub moves along the course, a dead reckoning estimated sub marker that updates along the course every 10 minutes or when you ask the navigator (should only take around 30 seconds for him to place it). Every time he takes another accurate position reading, he would automatically place icon the map and update the course to correct any errors.
3. A layer of the old "accurate" markers with a connecting line between them or "bread crumbs" as some call them.

Apart from that, the only difference between nr.2 and this pseudo nr.1 would be that you could tell the the navigator to rest and only allow you to take the precise markings (the estimated ones should still be up to him to allow the sub to change course at waypoints automatically), so it could be switched in-game without any loss of difficulty percentage.

The skill of the navigator is not nearly that important. Sextant readings are very well documented and it's hard to mess them up. But his skill would be incredibly important when the sub makes small maneuvers during attacks. On long trips, the helmsman's skill would be adamant to keeping a course (altough without wind factor and currents I guess his errors need to be "forced").

[Hylander_1314]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

This has all been discussed many times before. I don't say it shouldn't be discussed again - it should. I just wanted to point out that there should also be an 'in-between' option.

1) Hard ('Realsitic'): Full navigation requiring sextant and compass, just as in real life.

2) Medium (My 'In-between'): The sub is shown on the map, and navigation is left up to the 'Navigator', but reliability depends on his skill level and whether stars, sun and land are visible for shooting, with the possibility of the sub marker being more and more off course the longer you go without a sighting.

3) Easy: Pretty much what we have now, optional for those who don't want to worry about it.

Sailor Steve, this is what we had in B-17 TME. There were 3 options for the navigator. Easy, Medium, and Difficult. Easy was like having a gps unit onboard the plane, with medium meaning you had to check the position every hour or so, and full time navigation where you had to check every 20 minutes of flight, and adjust the plane's position marker on the map according to landmarks like rivers, towns, cities, bases, road juctions, and of course the target you are to bomb.

Now to add to the real nav. option, have weather and cloud cover be a deciding factor on when you can take a sun or star shot. Also with high winds, not having to worry about planes. Something to keep them grounded above a certain wind speed.

[vanjast]

If the 'real navigation' option is not implemented, could the devs makes the night sky, sunrise/set, moon rise/set/phase.. as accurate as possible to the time period - This shouldn't be much of a workload.

Also could they make the following info available for modding.

- The vertical angle of binocs, scope and obscope
- Base time, longitude time..etc..
- Ability to add an operational sextant as a screen.

The rest will be done by the 'Nav Community'.

Thanks
Van


edt: gammar error

[THE_MASK]

Originally Posted by vanjast

If the 'real navigation' option is not implemented, could the devs makes the night sky, sunrise/set, moon rise/set/phase.. as accurate as possible to the time period - This should be much of a workload.

Also could they make the following info available for modding.

- The vertical angle of binocs, scope and obscope
- Base time, longitude time..etc..
- Ability to add an operational sextant as a screen.

The rest will be done by the 'Nav Community'.

Thanks
Van

Question and answer by the devs .
Will the navigation map handle the earth as a cylinder like in SH3?

Yes. Although not geographically correct, the cylindrical view is the easiest to understand and use of all cartographical projections, especially if we consider the possibility that the player could roam all the seas as he / she wishes. We investigated other projections as well, using a globe or specific maps of several locations (like they did in reality) but the drawbacks in terms of usability, freedom and understanding were too big to consider them further. Also, there is a number of technical problems associated to other geographical projections, which we chose not to tackle for now.

[Sgtmonkeynads]

I sort of think that if one is going to go all out and make a realistic sim, then yes, no gps. Although i see my self very lost in the future, go east or west long enough you will hit land. Just go ashore and ask for directions.

[Hitman]

Actually, the good old aces of the deep already shipped with that "fake-rounded" earth How? Simply by making the game chart/map not be the common merchator projection, but instead accounting for real proportions. Sure, it could do it because not the whole world was covered, but still it was a great thing. Convoys sailed in straight line from New York to the irish channel, whereas in SH3 they are making a big curve. That curve is actually the correction for the rounded shape of the earth; in real life you can travel straigth.

The main problem so far -I think- is that while there are lots of Geosurvellance data maps in mercator format, it is much more expensive to buy one for the game which takes that curvature into account. And doing it from scratch would misplace most depth data or be a huge work.

[PL_Andrev]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

This has all been discussed many times before. I don't say it shouldn't be discussed again - it should. I just wanted to point out that there should also be an 'in-between' option.

1) Hard ('Realsitic'): Full navigation requiring sextant and compass, just as in real life.

2) Medium (My 'In-between'): The sub is shown on the map, and navigation is left up to the 'Navigator', but reliability depends on his skill level and whether stars, sun and land are visible for shooting, with the possibility of the sub marker being more and more off course the longer you go without a sighting.

You're not alone on the ship. You have officers from the dirty work.
Ask navigator...