Forced retirement (merged)

[Herr Kapitan]

Whatever peoples feelings about posters who express dissapointment about the performance of SH4 there is no need to be rude and discorteous.

I have no idea whether the OP is a new of existing member but telling him that he is in the wrong before even offering help is most unfortunate to say the least.

How would you feel if you had a real problem and someone said get lost bozo, no one will help you unless you learn to use the search facility.

By the way some individuals need to remove from their heads the idea that anyone who expresses their dissatisfaction with the game is automatically a ranter. In my opinion people who label others ranters are no less biased in their views than others who label supporters of this game fanboys.

[Tony1]

After getting a new Balao Sub at Pearl, I was transferred to Brisbane. When I returned to Brisbane after sinking 18 ships I was only able to refit. I traveled to Freemantle I was able to dock. Upon docking I received metals and was told that my sub class (Balao) was being retired and me along with it due to poor performance. End of career. However, I started to look into what could of show a lack of performance. Upon looking into the "CareerTrack" file, there were no entres for my last patrol out of Brisbane. For whatever reason SH4 failed to record my sinks throughout my laswt patrol and upon docking it must have concidered me an poor performer based on the "CareerTrack" file.

[Juju]

Originally Posted by Tony1

After getting a new Balao Sub at Pearl, I was transferred to Brisbane. When I returned to Brisbane after sinking 18 ships I was only able to refit. I traveled to Freemantle I was able to dock. Upon docking I received metals and was told that my sub class (Balao) was being retired and me along with it due to poor performance. End of career. However, I started to look into what could of show a lack of performance. Upon looking into the "CareerTrack" file, there were no entres for my last patrol out of Brisbane. For whatever reason SH4 failed to record my sinks throughout my laswt patrol and upon docking it must have concidered me an poor performer based on the "CareerTrack" file.

So, if this is a "feature," as some here are claiming, why, oh, why is the 'careertrack' not updating during the patrol prior to forced retirement (I haven't mentioned this in my previous post, but when I checked my careertrack file I saw the same thing Tony1 saw)?
I hazard a guess that -at that point- the game already 'knows' it's going to retire you when next time you dock. (hence not updating the file). If that's the case, why send a player out on a new patrol when it has somehow already been 'decided' you will not get credit for it anyway and that you're going to be retired, regardless. Doesn't sound like a feature to me, regardless how it was in real life. Let's not kid ourselves, simulation or not, this is still first and foremost a piece of computer software intended to be a GAME.
Also, if it is a feature, why tell a player his brand new Balao is being taken out of service, when it is actually only just entered? Not exactly historically accurate, now is it?
Lastly, if it is a feature, why is it not documented, why is there not a realism option to enable/disable it. From a consumer standpoint this is just not acceptable.

The only theory I've read here so far that sounded reasonable, is that careers are being terminated when the sub class you started the career with is being taking out of commision, regardless of the one you have now. Sadly, I haven't read any follow-ups on that assumption. It should probably mean people who started a career with one of the older S boats should get a forced retirement sooner than people who start one with a Tambor, or a Gar. I'd also like to know if this ever happened to people who started their career at a later date with either a Gato or a Balao.

That said, I want to add here that It's not my intention to stir up trouble, I do love the game, and I really long to play it some more. But not in the state it's in now. I don't like it, but this game stays shelved until I can decide whether I want to stop playing.

[Beery]

Originally Posted by Juju

So, if this is a "feature," as some here are claiming, why, oh, why is the 'careertrack' not updating during the patrol prior to forced retirement (I haven't mentioned this in my previous post, but when I checked my careertrack file I saw the same thing Tony1 saw)?

SH3 (and presumably SH4) careers always update one patrol late. This caused a lot of problems with SH3 Commander. I assume the career patrol files are kept in some temporary file until they're overwritten by the next patrol, at which time they're written to the permanent file. It's just another example of the unintuitive and ass-backwards way the code in this game seems to work (or not work).

There still may be a bug here - personally I've yet to be forcibly retired so I can't say for sure either way, but one thing is for sure - this needs to be optional - you should always be asked if you want to retire. If it's a feature it needs to be made optional and if it's a bug it needs to be fixed.

[NZ_Wanderer]

I'm with you here Juju, I love the game/Simulation as well, I DO want to play it (up until last night when I was forced to retire, I had been having a great time, even showing others the graphics and stuff and encouraging them to go buy it (I won't be encouraging anyone else after last night tho)), but as you said, not in the state it is in now (actually, this is the ONLY thing in the whole game/Simulation I have a problem with..)
If I get the urge to load SH4 again, I might try out that theory you mentioned in your post about the sub you started with and report back, but at the moment the urge to play SH4 again has deserted me (much like the game dersrting me cause it decided I had to retire)

Originally Posted by Juju

The only theory I've read here so far that sounded reasonable, is that careers are being terminated when the sub class you started the career with is being taking out of commision, regardless of the one you have now. Sadly, I haven't read any follow-ups on that assumption. It should probably mean people who started a career with one of the older S boats should get a forced retirement sooner than people who start one with a Tambor, or a Gar. I'd also like to know if this ever happened to people who started their career at a later date with either a Gato or a Balao.
That said, I want to add here that It's not my intention to stir up trouble, I do love the game, and I really long to play it some more. But not in the state it's in now. I don't like it, but this game stays shelved until I can decide whether I want to stop playing.

[Beery]

Let me be totally frank here. I think a big problem the arcade and less hardcore crowd are running into here is that the hardcore crowd have been sidelined for so long that when a game comes along that includes a hardcore element like enforced career limits we jump to its defence as if we're defending our very civilization (which, in a way, we are). The fear I have, and I'm sure many hardcore simmers feel the same way, is that this realism feature will be taken away from us completely, and we'll be forced to create our own half-assed way of ending careers after a realistically short length of time (as we had to for SH3 until SH3 Commander came along). The non-hardcore players might be happy with removing the career patrol limitations altogether, but it will leave us hardcore folks sidelined yet again, as we have been in so many (SO MANY) so-called simulations that failed to simulate to the degree we prefer.

What's needed here are options, but sadly all too often we hear calls for this realism feature to be removed altogether. The more casual players don't want such realism and they don't really consider that there are a bunch of players who DO want this feature. If we have options we can all have what we want. So I guess this is a call to all of the more casual players out there: don't just say "This sucks!" or "why does it have to be this way?" or "Remove this ridiculous limitation". Remember that some of us prefer it this way and suggest (as some have done) that not having a limitation be an option.

[NZ_Wanderer]

All I would like to see is an option in the realism settings to be able to turn realistic patrol lengths ON or OFF...

Nothing more, nothing less... That way everyone gets what they want..

[joea]

Originally Posted by Beery

Let me be totally frank here. I think a big problem the arcade and less hardcore crowd are running into here is that the hardcore crowd have been sidelined for so long that when a game comes along that includes a hardcore element like enforced career limits we jump to its defence as if we're defending our very civilization (which, in a way, we are). The fear I have, and I'm sure many hardcore simmers feel the same way, is that this realism feature will be taken away from us completely, and we'll be forced to create our own half-assed way of ending careers after a realistically short length of time (as we had to for SH3 until SH3 Commander came along). The non-hardcore players might be happy with removing the career patrol limitations altogether, but it will leave us hardcore folks sidelined yet again, as we have been in so many (SO MANY) so-called simulations that failed to simulate to the degree we prefer.

What's needed here are options, but sadly all too often we hear calls for this realism feature to be removed altogether. The more casual players don't want such realism and they don't really consider that there are a bunch of players who DO want this feature. If we have options we can all have what we want. So I guess this is a call to all of the more casual players out there: don't just say "This sucks!" or "why does it have to be this way?" or "Remove this ridiculous limitation". Remember that some of us prefer it this way and suggest (as some have done) that not having a limitation be an option.

Bears repeating:



I mean the same thing could be said with the naval and merchant traffic, as well as air attack settings, thankfully those can be tweaked.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Beery

Let me be totally frank here. I think a big problem the arcade and less hardcore crowd are running into here is that the hardcore crowd have been sidelined for so long that when a game comes along that includes a hardcore element like enforced career limits we jump to its defence as if we're defending our very civilization (which, in a way, we are). The fear I have, and I'm sure many hardcore simmers feel the same way, is that this realism feature will be taken away from us completely, and we'll be forced to create our own half-assed way of ending careers after a realistically short length of time (as we had to for SH3 until SH3 Commander came along). The non-hardcore players might be happy with removing the career patrol limitations altogether, but it will leave us hardcore folks sidelined yet again, as we have been in so many (SO MANY) so-called simulations that failed to simulate to the degree we prefer.

What's needed here are options, but sadly all too often we hear calls for this realism feature to be removed altogether. The more casual players don't want such realism and they don't really consider that there are a bunch of players who DO want this feature. If we have options we can all have what we want. So I guess this is a call to all of the more casual players out there: don't just say "This sucks!" or "why does it have to be this way?" or "Remove this ridiculous limitation". Remember that some of us prefer it this way and suggest (as some have done) that not having a limitation be an option.

Actually, with the exception of a small number of very, shall we say, vehement proponents, the vast majority of those who are having issue with the feature in this thread are calling for it to be an option.