If there is an SH5

[LtCmdrRat]

Gents, with all respect to all opinions, I offer idea of Alternative History on the Earth2 (parallel Universe if you want).
All sub technologies of post WWII era (diesels technologies, I like decimus diesel offer) and 2 or 3 states having permament "hot" submarine conflict having goal to take certain areas of oceans floor under thier control. War for resourses. sub/ship(ai) against sub /ships(under ai) war.
No USA, no Soviet Union, no China. Just for example North Empire against South United Kingdom. No ideology blsht.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

- The whole WW2 axis vs allies thing is overdone. Some folks are die hard atlantic, others die hard pacific, i think its time to step away from both theaters.

As the devs have now the knowledge on the german and american campaigns... How about developing a new SH that could give the choice to play as a sub commander or a u-boot kapitän, using a new 3D engine and all ?

Then, there would be no more war between pacific and atlantic players, as the 2 sides would be available.

[sqk7744]

Good call dean_acheson!

[LtCmdrRat]

i insist on sub vs sub hunting game! :-)

[Extra Ketchup]

I think if done right, a cold war simulation could be very interesting. Having served on a nuke sub and taken part in TREs (simulating full-out Naval engagements), I found the real-life experience quite engaging!

There are obvious differences between modern nuke and WWII diesel subs. Shooting tends to be a lot easier. Computers pretty much make torpedo launches a point-n-click operation. Torpedo yields make it pretty easy to sink something. Torpedoes can also be fired from further away.

The challenge arises in avoiding detection, surviving enemy homing torpedoes, dealing with tricky things like nuclear reactors, etc.

One big difference is that the role of the submarine is a bit different. To sink a ship in the modern world, a harpoon missile launched from ship or aircraft is the quickest and easiest way. Subs are now more interested in other subs, as well as well as watching enemy fleets undetected, inserting special forces, etc.

All that said, if the right sense of immersion could be provided (and I've yet to play a 688 simulator that does a good job at this), it could be a lot of fun. However, I do know what you are all saying - the more automated and technologically-advanced something becomes, usually the less "fun" it is. For example, modern aircraft engagements (shoot before you see the enemy and let the missile do all the work) just don't play out like a good, old-fashioned dogfight in a bi-plane over WWI Europe... The same can be said for Naval engagements.. I say all this regarding computer games, not the real thing (there is nothing "fun" about real war).

[stlkrash]

How bout take what we have and add true time GMT multiplayer thats not mission based, but, an evolving thing like wwii online in a way. It could include strat elements as the sub elements, perhaps playable task forces. Basically set it up in true time world wide and you can play the big 4 USA UK GER JAP. Them leave it somewhat more open ended and see where it goes. Also set up some ture time radio servers. True comms, tele type and lamps. Just my ideas in rought form.

[ryu1940]

By true time you mean no time compression? I get underway for a living...the thought of a true time naval sim in non combat phases of a mission doesn't sound very appealing.

[Javelin]

Seems like many years ago, but I remember playing Red Strom Rising. I thought that it was a very good sim, and always wanted some gaming company to take that and redo it using todays graphics, etc.

[dean_acheson]

thanks for all the comments guys, I have to admit, I shill for DC2 everywhere and anywhere that I can.

only by complaining, and whining, and asking, and cajoling, are we ever going to get it.

please UBI? pretty please?

[woodstock74]

Originally Posted by Extra Ketchup

I think if done right, a cold war simulation could be very interesting. Having served on a nuke sub and taken part in TREs (simulating full-out Naval engagements), I found the real-life experience quite engaging!

There are obvious differences between modern nuke and WWII diesel subs. Shooting tends to be a lot easier. Computers pretty much make torpedo launches a point-n-click operation. Torpedo yields make it pretty easy to sink something. Torpedoes can also be fired from further away.

The challenge arises in avoiding detection, surviving enemy homing torpedoes, dealing with tricky things like nuclear reactors, etc.

One big difference is that the role of the submarine is a bit different. To sink a ship in the modern world, a harpoon missile launched from ship or aircraft is the quickest and easiest way. Subs are now more interested in other subs, as well as well as watching enemy fleets undetected, inserting special forces, etc.

All that said, if the right sense of immersion could be provided (and I've yet to play a 688 simulator that does a good job at this), it could be a lot of fun. However, I do know what you are all saying - the more automated and technologically-advanced something becomes, usually the less "fun" it is. For example, modern aircraft engagements (shoot before you see the enemy and let the missile do all the work) just don't play out like a good, old-fashioned dogfight in a bi-plane over WWI Europe... The same can be said for Naval engagements.. I say all this regarding computer games, not the real thing (there is nothing "fun" about real war).

I agree, it could be very intersting. Set in a late 70s, early 80s time period, and then you have many many sub possibilities to choose from (from diesel subs [both sides, don't forget the Barbell class!] and 3rd generation Nukes).

[Redux626]

In my Opinion they need to Switch over to something like SUB HUNTER or something like SH. I wanna control a DD or a BB with the same interactivity as SH

[retroflow]

It would be simple to have a new version of the game where you pick a country, a side to "fight" for and you get whatever is available to that country. Plenty of RTS games use this almost traditionally. It's really a question as to whether or not Ubisoft wants to do anything like this. They seem focused mainly on Console games than PC.

Erm.. what exactly is Ubisoft's interaction or involvment with the Modders and players here? Some think they watch here but, does anyone know for sure? Just something I'm thinking about.

Firaxis games commisioned Modders of Sid Meyer's Civilization III prior to releasing subsequent expansion packs. They also did a lot of direct chatting with the players for feedback and what have you. I'm just curious as to whether or not Ubisoft has ever done anything like that here. For a site that promotes their games so well, you'd think they'd have more presence. This is a very large fan and customer base.

And for the record, I think the modders here have done an excellent job. All of you.

[TDK1044]

I think the Add On to SH4 shows you the direction that Ubisoft are heading in. I would expect the next offering to either be set in the cold war era, or a fictitious modern day naval warfare game.

[tonibamestre]

Why not just do like people from Fighter Ops project? Develop further releases and addons,upgrading at the same time the engine and software parallel to new hardware. This way we could have improved SH....X year by year,with better sceneries,efects,and implementing new controllable units packs and systems-weapons technology till reach our days.

Come on Ubi,give us that Sturgeon,Foxtrot,FFG7 or Gearing bridges !! And more to come!

Make your fans happy

[retroflow]

Originally Posted by tonibamestre

Why not just do like people from Fighter Ops project? Develop further releases and addons,upgrading at the same time the engine and software parallel to new hardware. This way we could have improved SH....X year by year,with better sceneries,efects,and implementing new controllable units packs and systems-weapons technology till reach our days.

Come on Ubi,give us that Sturgeon,Foxtrot,FFG7 or Gearing bridges !! And more to come!

Make your fans happy

Exactly. Like EA's The Sims2 does it, for example. You start with the base game and add any of the available expansion packs to improve upon it. But, like the Sims2, you get more from the game if you use all ofthe expansion packs together. Clever marketing and oh, so lucrative. Keeps the fans hungry and buying expansions.