Carriers/dynamic campaign

High Command · 04-04-07, 08:46 AM

Its sad.

I see here, i have sunk TWISE the amount of total Carriers Japan had intill March 1941.

Thay just semes to have some form for UNLIMITED Storage of Carriers.

Not to mantion, that a singel sub isnt supose to be able to faind ALL the Japanese Carriers...
Way to many and way to easy to faind them..

PeriscopeDepth · 04-04-07, 08:52 AM

Dude, every Subsim that's ever been made before has been like this. And I still enjoy playing them. And I still don't feel like I need to put multiple sad smiley faces in my posts. If you really don't want to sink more carriers or whatever than actually existed....Well, don't. After you scratch actual number of a given class off the IJN fleet roster, just don't sink any more of that given class if you happen to encounter them.

PD

oche · 04-04-07, 09:10 AM

Now i know that there are limitations to the game engine and i don't to whine about the dynamic campaign found in SH3 and SH4 because at this moment it is perfect for me as it is (I hate linear campaigns just like the one found in SH2 nevertheless thankfully the modding community took care of that), and I know how dissapointing it is to see those carriers appearing again and again after being sunk or even other Battleships, i wonder if someone out there is taking into account the thousands of G4M bettys and other planes roaming the skies of the pacific in SH4?, so this basically calls attention proving that the dynamic campaign is no different than the one found in the original Silent Hunter a decade ago and not much superior to the one found in Silent Service II which is even older. I don't know if it's too much to ask to see in the near future a WW2 dynamic campaign either made by the dev team or modding community implying that if you sink or destroy something it wouldn't appear again in your patrols or missions, but i guess we have to conform with what we have so far.

04-04-07, 08:46 AM	#1
High Command Swabbie Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 13 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Its sad. I see here, i have sunk TWISE the amount of total Carriers Japan had intill March 1941. Thay just semes to have some form for UNLIMITED Storage of Carriers. Not to mantion, that a singel sub isnt supose to be able to faind ALL the Japanese Carriers... Way to many and way to easy to faind them..

04-04-07, 08:52 AM	#2
PeriscopeDepth Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 1,894 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Dude, every Subsim that's ever been made before has been like this. And I still enjoy playing them. And I still don't feel like I need to put multiple sad smiley faces in my posts. If you really don't want to sink more carriers or whatever than actually existed....Well, don't. After you scratch actual number of a given class off the IJN fleet roster, just don't sink any more of that given class if you happen to encounter them. PD

04-04-07, 09:10 AM	#3
oche Electrician's Mate Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Santo Domingo Posts: 131 Downloads: 94 Uploads: 0	Now i know that there are limitations to the game engine and i don't to whine about the dynamic campaign found in SH3 and SH4 because at this moment it is perfect for me as it is (I hate linear campaigns just like the one found in SH2 nevertheless thankfully the modding community took care of that), and I know how dissapointing it is to see those carriers appearing again and again after being sunk or even other Battleships, i wonder if someone out there is taking into account the thousands of G4M bettys and other planes roaming the skies of the pacific in SH4?, so this basically calls attention proving that the dynamic campaign is no different than the one found in the original Silent Hunter a decade ago and not much superior to the one found in Silent Service II which is even older. I don't know if it's too much to ask to see in the near future a WW2 dynamic campaign either made by the dev team or modding community implying that if you sink or destroy something it wouldn't appear again in your patrols or missions, but i guess we have to conform with what we have so far.