damage graphics overdone?

[Armistead]

Yea, wait until you take a good bomb hit and half your sub looks like a skeleton frame, yet your sub works fine. Someone could probably replace the damage textures to be more realistic, but I don't think anyone cares.

One five inch shell would usually spell doom for your sub, certainly would kill people in the area it hit.

Mods can correct the damage zone and crew health to a degree.

Originally Posted by Armistead

Yea, wait until you take a good bomb hit and half your sub looks like a skeleton frame, yet your sub works fine. Someone could probably replace the damage textures to be more realistic, but I don't think anyone cares.

i think way back when things like this were being discussed it was decided that any damage would likely sink you anyway so making that realistic would make the game unplayable so whats the point in modding the visual if you cant correct the realism too.

a lot of people were fresh from sh4 at the time an obsessed with ralism so maybe someone would be willing to take another look at it by now.

i would think its like rocks and seagrass in that if you just resize the holes to be more in line with what you would "assume" would be better to scale and not worry about how realistic it is or isnt would be a big improvement

[AndytotheD]

I don't particularly mind, I just found it strange that i could get a ten foot hole in the side of my submarine and survive.

[razark]

I think the solution to the problem is rather simple:
Don't get hit by the enemy. If you're getting hit, you're doing it wrong.


My favorite is when I torpedo an enemy ship, and the propeller shafts are gone, but the props are still spinning away happily. (Of course, again, if you're torpedoing ships, and their propellers are still working, you're doing it wrong. )

The massive holes in submarines and targets are a bit overdone. It's nice to see a hole appear, but it should really be related to the amount of damage done. It's annoying to see a line of holes down the side of a ship with the bow blown open, and the ship doesn't even slow down.

Originally Posted by razark

I think the solution to the problem is rather simple:
Don't get hit by the enemy. If you're getting hit, you're doing it wrong.


My favorite is when I torpedo an enemy ship, and the propeller shafts are gone, but the props are still spinning away happily. (Of course, again, if you're torpedoing ships, and their propellers are still working, you're doing it wrong. )

The massive holes in submarines and targets are a bit overdone. It's nice to see a hole appear, but it should really be related to the amount of damage done. It's annoying to see a line of holes down the side of a ship with the bow blown open, and the ship doesn't even slow down.

thats one of my pet peeves with the game, if you open a hole into the engine compartment of any ship there should no longer be any engine power or propulsion.

i cant recall which one but there is a CL cruiser you can blow the props off of yet it continues on at full speed with NO PROPELLARS!

[Arael]

Originally Posted by Webster

thats one of my pet peeves with the game, if you open a hole into the engine compartment of any ship there should no longer be any engine power or propulsion.

i cant recall which one but there is a CL cruiser you can blow the props off of yet it continues on at full speed with NO PROPELLARS!

HIJMS Red October? The one with the experimental supplementary drive built into the hull away from the props?

[Cybermat47]

The graphics are way overdone.
Imagine my face as a massive hole appeared in my beloved Type IXD/2!

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Armistead

One five inch shell would usually spell doom for your sub, certainly would kill people in the area it hit.

Mods can correct the damage zone and crew health to a degree.

In RFB, shells are more lethal (to your sub, I mean), I was sunk by hits from a light flak gun on a merchant. It must have been 25mm or smaller. It didn't take that many rounds either. I can't comment on hits from larger shells, since I avoid artillery duels now.

[Littica Marek]

I personally would love to see it, even if the only time i should expect to see my boat full of holes is when i have done something honestly stupid.

I hope if they do indeed make another game *Not Silent Hunter Online* they have more realistic damage modles.

Just thinking, what other things would you like to see in a theoretical Silent Hunter 6?

Myself?
A Semi-Original-Dynamic-War, Spanning Most of the history of our beloved War going Subersables or at least WW1 to mostly modern times.

Originally Posted by Littica Marek

I hope if they do indeed make another game *Not Silent Hunter Online* they have more realistic damage modles.

Just thinking, what other things would you like to see in a theoretical Silent Hunter 6?

Myself?
A Semi-Original-Dynamic-War, Spanning Most of the history of our beloved War going Subersables or at least WW1 to mostly modern times.

every sh game ubisoft released was more of a dissappointment then the last in that the things that worked great in the game were broken or changed to be worse then the previous game version. sh3 had things that worked wonderfully yet in sh4 most of that stopped working because of changes made to create sh4 and they didnt use the same devs, the same thing happened with sh5 but to even more of an extreme as they turned it into an arcade game. they put devs that have no idea how the previous version worked to create a newer version from the old version so they do things that cause things that were working perfectly to be unfixably broken.

the decission makers at ubi have shown they dont value the concept of putting the same people who created a game to work on the newer versions of that game so these well meaning hard working guys are trying hard but they just dont know what they are doing to the game most of the time.

the modders here and elsewhere have managed to turn very rough unfinished buggy games into very well done games that have the look and feel of a finished and debugged game.

for the reasons stated above each sh series has brought in less revenue then the version before it and with the sh5 debackle ubi has finally abandoned all hope of ever creating another one. they dont hear or listen to customers or they would finish a game before its released so you dont need 4 or 5 patches the first year. they dont care about game the way the customers do so its all about $$$ and they dont see more versions of sh as bringing in enough $$$ to be worth the effort.

[AndytotheD]

I disagree. I think SHIV is the best, I could never play SHII properly due to the stupendously bad campaign system. Meanwhile in V1.00 of SHIV, did anyone have a problem on vista where an attempt at maunual targeting using the stadimeter cause an error that closed the game?
I fixed it by updating but I found it strange.

Originally Posted by AndytotheD

I disagree. I think SHIV is the best, I could never play SHII properly due to the stupendously bad campaign system. Meanwhile in V1.00 of SHIV, did anyone have a problem on vista where an attempt at maunual targeting using the stadimeter cause an error that closed the game?
I fixed it by updating but I found it strange.

i never said sh3 was the "best" i said it had the most fully functioning features (and im not talking aboiut which version does or does not have the most features) and the AI and game engine "worked" the best overall of the three. (again im not talking about which game has the best AI or game engine)

my favorite of the 3 versions is sh4 with sh3 as a close second although im expecting sh5 will replace it in the #2 spot at some point when it matures through many more mods in a few years. i prefer fleetboats and thats why i choose the way i do, those who prefer uboats favor sh3 as the #1 choice but to each his (or her) own.

there is a lot involved in these games the average player doesnt notice such as the floatation charactoristics as well as the way the sea acts and reacts to things. other things such as the environment has so much that goes far beyond just how cool things look but the experienced modder can see things that dont work right now that did before and these are the types of things i refer to.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Littica Marek

I personally would love to see it, even if the only time i should expect to see my boat full of holes is when i have done something honestly stupid.

Yeah, what happened is that I spotted a lone freighter and chased him on the surface firing my 4 inch. If I had tried a submerged approach he would have gotten by. By damaging him, I was able to close the distance and figured I would finish him off by pulling along his starboard side and placing another half dozen shells along the waterline. That is when the previously unseen light flak gun on the side opened fire on me. I crashed dived, but it was too late. As our boat sat on the bottom filling with water, we could hear our enemy sinking close by. Truly a Pyhrric victory. I find it questionable that even an S-boat could be sunk so easily, but thats the breaks, I guess.

Just thinking, what other things would you like to see in a theoretical Silent Hunter 6?

I would like to see:

• Rock-solid physics. Ships move or sink as they should, sensors that detect what they should, weapons and equipment that works or malfunctions as it should.
• A better campaign with provision for a fictional (random) campaign.
• An outstanding TDC (or course) and a Mk VIII angle solver.

God, I could probably write 10 pages about this.

From Webster:

there is a lot involved in these games the average player doesnt notice such as the floatation charactoristics as well as the way the sea acts and reacts to things. other things such as the environment has so much that goes far beyond just how cool things look but the experienced modder can see things that dont work right now that did before and these are the types of things i refer to.

This is so true. It still bothers me that when I'm at sea in my little S-boat, that it glides through the waves in supposedly "stormy" seas. And I miss the deluxe features of SHCE such as the working SD radar and bathythermograph, not to mention the cozy captain's cabin.



It often seems the gulf between what Ubisoft released to us and what could have been created, is as wide as the grand canyon.

[BigWalleye]

TorpX, I am confused. You want "(r)ock-solid physics. Ships move or sink as they should, sensors that detect what they should, weapons and equipment that works or malfunctions as it should." (And amen to all of that!) Then you want SD radar and a BT plotter on your S-boat, where historically they never were. Why simulate the sensor physics accurately, then use that accurate sensor in an ahistorical setting?

[Littica Marek]

I would think he means that he wants them to all work as they would in reality or as close as possible, and the other things are forms of gameplay aids