Silent Hunter IV U-Boat Mission add-on - Page 2

Gunner · 10-30-07, 03:25 PM

Looks like source came from Audibleknight on the ubisoft forum

bigboywooly · 10-30-07, 03:32 PM

I will have to see if I can find the original text but was pitched something along the lines of you can make a difference

If you take out all the IJN heavies they wont reappear

To a certain extent you are right in ship production but the US wasnt the only ones involved in either TO
Sink all the RN carriers and they respawn anyway
There was no way the RN were going to whack out a few more
Same with BBs
The RN only built one during the war and comissioned too late to be of any use

Still I suppose either way is a matter of choice
Sink a shedload of DDs early on so late war is simple or
Sink them and they appear again

Meh

tater · 10-30-07, 03:40 PM

As long as the campaign is done so that you don't sink huge numbers of ships (in the PTO, anyway) it's not too bad. Unless you keep track and know that there were only X Mutsuki DDs you are unlikely to think you've sunk all of them.

The "zebra" units (rare and interesting compared to "horses"

) are another story. 2 Yamatos, zero possibility of there ever being more. If you sink one, you should never see 2 together, much less sink 2.

Makes doing a really compulsive campaign hard. It would also be nice if you could make a unit within a group disappear. Right now you make a Battle of Midway for the campaign, and the only way to sink the flattops is to put enough bombers around that they always all sink. Course you'll likely sink everything else, as well.

(actually, I just got an idea that might work... damn complex, though.)

mrbeast · 10-30-07, 03:36 PM

I think the devs must have left it out because although making a roster with a finite number of units of a certain class is 'doable' it would take a lot of work to list all the Marus and decide which ship models should represent them.

All the info is fairly easy to access its just a case of an extended research project to complile it all.

Rockin Robbins · 10-30-07, 08:06 PM

When the devs released patch 1.3 they exceeded every hope I had, especially in the removal of Darth Sony's evil copy protection farce. After what they have done with Silent Hunter 4, I'm ready to give them the benefit of the doubt and buy this add-on. They earned my trust and I'm willing to reward them. I'm not worried I won't receive a great value for my investment.

I already have!

If you just have no interest in U-Boats, I can understand not buying the game. If you're into SHIII, expecially if you're a modder, there's no telling how much you can learn there! Also consider that proceeds from this would finance and demonstrate feasibility for future mods and add-ons. All those Atlantic ports weren't created not to be used. If we will not support them, they cannot support us. All possible futures must be paid for. No free lunches exist, especially in socialist countries. I'll gladly pay for my lunch.

rrmelend · 10-30-07, 03:26 PM

I agree with what Tater said earlier; if it adds something significant to gameplay sure but I have no desire to play u-boats. I never bought SH2 or SH3 for that reason. I'm a USN Pacific Theater nut.

mrbeast · 10-30-07, 03:06 PM

Not sure the new 'strategic' options appeal that much to me, I mean how many subs or U boats radioed for a plane to recon for enemy shipping or called in a passing battle group to dispatch a snooping ASW group?

Doesn't sound very realistic to me.

Tater, the idea that when you sink a ship in the game you remove a named unit from the roster sounds very cool to me too. That way the names of the ships you sink could appear on a patrol report.

Perhaps some degree of random factor could be introduced, maybe the intel people can't identify the ship you sank or even get name wrong and correct it later. Perhaps tonnage totals could be made more random too, all being revealed at the end of your career.

Also would be good to introduce damaged tonnage added to your total as curently any ships you damage are a waste of torpedoes you don't score anything for them AFAIK (unless renown is awarded for them?)

Capt. Shark Bait · 10-31-07, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maerean_m

Maybe you should wait for the first reviews before making up your mind.

now there's a thought. i don't get why ppl have to condenm something they havn't played yet. i'll definitely be pickin this one up

10-30-07, 03:25 PM	#1
Gunner Navy Dude Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 177 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	Looks like source came from Audibleknight on the ubisoft forum __________________

10-30-07, 03:32 PM	#2
bigboywooly Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Swindon, England Posts: 10,151 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	I will have to see if I can find the original text but was pitched something along the lines of you can make a difference If you take out all the IJN heavies they wont reappear To a certain extent you are right in ship production but the US wasnt the only ones involved in either TO Sink all the RN carriers and they respawn anyway There was no way the RN were going to whack out a few more Same with BBs The RN only built one during the war and comissioned too late to be of any use Still I suppose either way is a matter of choice Sink a shedload of DDs early on so late war is simple or Sink them and they appear again Meh __________________ My mediafire page http://www.mediafire.com/?11eoq19bq9r41

10-30-07, 03:36 PM	#4
mrbeast Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bolton, UK Posts: 1,236 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I think the devs must have left it out because although making a roster with a finite number of units of a certain class is 'doable' it would take a lot of work to list all the Marus and decide which ship models should represent them. All the info is fairly easy to access its just a case of an extended research project to complile it all. __________________

10-30-07, 08:06 PM	#5
Rockin Robbins Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: DeLand, FL Posts: 8,900 Downloads: 135 Uploads: 52	I'll buy it on trust When the devs released patch 1.3 they exceeded every hope I had, especially in the removal of Darth Sony's evil copy protection farce. After what they have done with Silent Hunter 4, I'm ready to give them the benefit of the doubt and buy this add-on. They earned my trust and I'm willing to reward them. I'm not worried I won't receive a great value for my investment. I already have! If you just have no interest in U-Boats, I can understand not buying the game. If you're into SHIII, expecially if you're a modder, there's no telling how much you can learn there! Also consider that proceeds from this would finance and demonstrate feasibility for future mods and add-ons. All those Atlantic ports weren't created not to be used. If we will not support them, they cannot support us. All possible futures must be paid for. No free lunches exist, especially in socialist countries. I'll gladly pay for my lunch. __________________ Sub Skipper's Bag of Tricks, Slightly Subnuclear Mk 14 & Cutie, Slightly Subnuclear Deck Gun, EZPlot 2.0, TMOPlot, TMOKeys, SH4CMS Last edited by Rockin Robbins; 10-30-07 at 08:18 PM.

10-30-07, 03:06 PM	#7
mrbeast Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bolton, UK Posts: 1,236 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Not sure the new 'strategic' options appeal that much to me, I mean how many subs or U boats radioed for a plane to recon for enemy shipping or called in a passing battle group to dispatch a snooping ASW group? Doesn't sound very realistic to me. Tater, the idea that when you sink a ship in the game you remove a named unit from the roster sounds very cool to me too. That way the names of the ships you sink could appear on a patrol report. Perhaps some degree of random factor could be introduced, maybe the intel people can't identify the ship you sank or even get name wrong and correct it later. Perhaps tonnage totals could be made more random too, all being revealed at the end of your career. Also would be good to introduce damaged tonnage added to your total as curently any ships you damage are a waste of torpedoes you don't score anything for them AFAIK (unless renown is awarded for them?) __________________

10-30-07, 03:40 PM	#3
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	As long as the campaign is done so that you don't sink huge numbers of ships (in the PTO, anyway) it's not too bad. Unless you keep track and know that there were only X Mutsuki DDs you are unlikely to think you've sunk all of them. The "zebra" units (rare and interesting compared to "horses" ) are another story. 2 Yamatos, zero possibility of there ever being more. If you sink one, you should never see 2 together, much less sink 2. Makes doing a really compulsive campaign hard. It would also be nice if you could make a unit within a group disappear. Right now you make a Battle of Midway for the campaign, and the only way to sink the flattops is to put enough bombers around that they always all sink. Course you'll likely sink everything else, as well. (actually, I just got an idea that might work... damn complex, though.)

10-30-07, 03:26 PM	#6
rrmelend Medic Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 162 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	I agree with what Tater said earlier; if it adds something significant to gameplay sure but I have no desire to play u-boats. I never bought SH2 or SH3 for that reason. I'm a USN Pacific Theater nut.