What's the Fascination with U-boats? - Page 6

AVGWarhawk · 01-27-10, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Seems like this ATO-PTO battle never ends.

Awesome!

AVGWarhawk · 01-27-10, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brag

Though important, US subs played a limited role in the Pacific Theater. Without the submarines participating, the results of this campaign would have still ended the same.

In the Atlantic, U-boats were the main protagonists on the German side and for a little while (1941-1942), threatened to nullify British naval supremacy.

In SH-3, the frustration of a U-boat commander is duplicated as after expending one's torpedoes one watches the convoy continue toward their destination.

Never mind the hammering from destroyers.

The U-boat crews fought a heroic contest and got close to changing history.

Where did you come up with that hub-bub. bub?

Ducimus · 01-27-10, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brag

Though important, US subs played a limited role in the Pacific Theater. Without the submarines participating, the results of this campaign would have still ended the same.

In the Atlantic, U-boats were the main protagonists on the German side and for a little while (1941-1942), threatened to nullify British naval supremacy.

In SH-3, the frustration of a U-boat commander is duplicated as after expending one's torpedoes one watches the convoy continue toward their destination.

Never mind the hammering from destroyers.

The U-boat crews fought a heroic contest and got close to changing history.

Ok, I had already spoke my piece and was going to let it all go, but since this was just pointed out....

I'll just state a few facts missing here, and leave my opinions to my other post:

Fact 1:
The US submarine force, all volunteers, comprised of less then 2% of US naval personnel deployed in the pacific. Some sources cite, they were 1.6% of all US naval personal in the Pacific

Fact 2:
Those 1.6%, did this:

Fact 3:
1 in 5 US Submariners lost their lives in the line of duty.

Fact 4:
The Submarine campaign in the pacific did alter the outcome of a few battles, (See USS harders 5th war patrol for the most famous example) and did indeed strangle the life line of Japan.

It's ok to have a theater preference, but really man, educate yourself.

psykopatsak · 01-27-10, 06:15 PM

the thing that makes SH4 (im keeping to the PTO, not the game interface and such now) so extremly boring is that first you have to travel across a quarter of the globe jus to get close to enemy shipping.

then at first you wont kill anything as your torpedoes suck, and then just leg it home, provided you werent attacked by a destroyer, in wich case you must dodge it first, and hope you dont accidentally reach crush depth while crash diving. the depth charges are so off that its not really an issue.

late war you torpedo some random ships, and then dodge the occational destroyer, using the excact same boat to sink the excact same ships with now functioning torpedoes, and by now there are scarcly any destroyers left. then on your way home again! just a few more months!

Task Force · 01-27-10, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

Yes but when you start having 3 episodes revolving around the same theater it becomes stale very quickly. SH 2, 3 and 5. Some new blood is needed, and put WWII behind. Explore WW I, the cold war, anything except WW II.
History didn't start and end there, its beyond stupid to have games or simulations that are stuck in that time period.
During the late ninties software houses were exploring the whole 20th century, not only in sub sims, naval sims, flight sims. Then everything started to fossilize on WWII. FPS and simulations. Enough is enough. Just how many fricking times can you play an uboat in the middle of the atlantic ?

Ubisoft grow a pair of @@ and leave WWII behind, start exploring the early cold war for instance.

They wont... Because it would affect sales...

WW1= small intrest, overshadowed by WW2

Cold war= Too complex for people who just want to sink stuff. (average gamers.

WW2= Larger intrest feild, not as complex as cold war, but still not too east.

Kretschmer the IV · 01-27-10, 06:34 PM

it's fascinating because the Kaleuns had balls.

i read many books so far about Uboot Krieg and the crew and the Kaleuns were very brave soldiers.
Often i imagine myself at their position, i would **** my pants.

Like some Kaleun, i do not know his name any more, observed the corridor from gibraltar to the mediteran sea. Battleships with destroyerescorts and a carrier. He decided to attack.. One Uboot against all...

I mean they were ******** heroes! And at the beginning of the war they behaved like knights, ritterlich, the helped out the survivors of wrecked ships. Gave them food, maps, maybe a compass, send a funktelegram on public frequency about survivors.

But the war moved on and this ritterlichkeit vanished and all ended up .. you know the rest ..

that's my opinion

thruster · 01-27-10, 06:34 PM

no disrespect to WW2 USN submarine service, but:
whilst each service developed their boats to suit their area of ops, the uboats [esp the type 7 series] were the quintessential 'submarine' of the era. i suggest that the reason the US boats were allowed to do so well was due to the IJN ASW ineptitude and inefficiency, and the sheer size of the AO. a US boat makes a german Type 9 look like a stealth fighter, a US boat wouldnt survive its first contact in the atlantic even in 1940.

whilst the US had a field day as the war progressed [biggest challenge actually finding targets], the uboats fought a totally aggressive adversary that became far more effective as the war progressed. personally, im saddened by the loss of all submariners, that said, the KM lost >3/4 of their uboat personnel, it became a gamble just to clear the bay of biscay and reach their AO. despite that they remained loyal to their mission to the very end.

from a gaming perspective and the challenge in gameplay, i cannot see any point in modelling the PTO at the expense of perfecting the ATO, or even the Med.

Task Force · 01-27-10, 06:49 PM

I also feel its time for a U boat sim on a up dated engine... which SH4 has...

even tho I think sh3 has better UI & its wave look more ocean like, not like crumpled up tin foil...

Ducimus · 01-27-10, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kretschmer the IV

it's fascinating because the Kaleuns had balls.

And i suppose thats insinuating nobody else did eh?

Well, you boys have fun romancing myth's that were ultimately propagated by ego, want of money, and a dash of proxy negationism. Ignorance is bliss as they say.

JU_88 · 01-27-10, 07:40 PM

I guess the facsination with U-boats, is due to their role in the most well-known/ most talked about submarine campaign in history.

In a nut shell - Fame.

Kretschmer the IV · 01-28-10, 05:47 AM

Quote:

And i suppose thats insinuating nobody else did eh?

Nah, it is not.
I just meant that the german navy knew all about their losses and they have done their duty like on 1st day of war.
And the mentioned aggressivness while attacking a convoy, surfacing in the middle of it and things like, entering scapa flow.
Thats brave, say what you want.

AVGWarhawk · 01-28-10, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JU_88

I guess the facsination with U-boats, is due to their role in the most well-known/ most talked about submarine campaign in history.

In a nut shell - Fame.

I would say the VII is famous. The VII is the most recognizable u of the war by most people. The fame aspect has nothing to do with the role of the U IMO. As far as the most talked about campaign in history, I would agree. But that talk is amongst those that are really interested. If it were not for folks here I would never talk about uboats. It never comes up in conversation. However, if I show a picture of a VII most will tell you it is a German U-boat.

As for fleets, it was the silent service. Not because the subs were quiet, know one spoke of their areas of patrol. It is unfortunate the silent part continued after the war. Much lost for those that are interested.

Jimbuna · 02-02-10, 10:08 AM

I'll admit my preference is for the ATO but having read so many books on WWII submarine warfare (and in particular I will cite the three Clay Blair volumes....Hitler's U-boat War v1 and 2 as well as Silent Victory) I am of the firm belief that both the Ubootwaffe and the US Navy had a major impact in their respective theatre of operations.

Different theatres, tactics, equipment, opposition etc. etc.

Tis pointless trying to compare apples with pears.

As Chris has rightly pointed out, the US didn't feel the need to publish masses of material early post war which ultimately led to a lack of public understanding....mores the pity.

AVGWarhawk · 02-02-10, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

I'll admit my preference is for the ATO but having read so many books on WWII submarine warfare (and in particular I will cite the three Clay Blair volumes....Hitler's U-boat War v1 and 2 as well as Silent Victory) I am of the firm belief that both the Ubootwaffe and the US Navy had a major impact in their respective theatre of operations.

Different theatres, tactics, equipment, opposition etc. etc.

Tis pointless trying to compare apples with pears.

As Chris has rightly pointed out, the US didn't feel the need to publish masses of material early post war which ultimately led to a lack of public understanding....mores the pity.

Jim,

Repective countries you and I live seemingly dictates our interests. The ATO was in England's backyard, frontyard and alleys. Naturally this is of interest to you. Family members who fought so forth and so on. Same deal with me. It is sad that the silent service was silent after the war. But I think we can say the spoils go to the victor meaning the losers are now an open book for all to see, read and write about. For the victors, how it was done and with what tools is not for public knowledge. Plus, Russia was not being to friendly after WW2. We witnessed what became of that. As time progresses a bit more comes to light on the submarines. The archives are available to anyone who is interested in reading about it.

karamazovnew · 02-02-10, 12:26 PM

I love all subs, don't care about their origin.

WW1:
- check out the total tonnage that some of the Kaleuns achieved. Most were with the deck gun but still... rudimentary aiming, poor performance, slacky ASW, a great game potential.

WW2:
- japanese: fighting warships is hard, it would be a very tense campaign
- americans: superb boats, amazing war-start. The big Pacific might be boring, but lying down in a crowded straight is never dull

- germans: best enemy, best campaign progression from easy to suicide (well, not in SH5), most beautiful boats.

01-27-10, 06:49 PM	#83
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,142 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	I also feel its time for a U boat sim on a up dated engine... which SH4 has... even tho I think sh3 has better UI & its wave look more ocean like, not like crumpled up tin foil... __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time"

02-02-10, 10:08 AM	#88
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,615 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	I'll admit my preference is for the ATO but having read so many books on WWII submarine warfare (and in particular I will cite the three Clay Blair volumes....Hitler's U-boat War v1 and 2 as well as Silent Victory) I am of the firm belief that both the Ubootwaffe and the US Navy had a major impact in their respective theatre of operations. Different theatres, tactics, equipment, opposition etc. etc. Tis pointless trying to compare apples with pears. As Chris has rightly pointed out, the US didn't feel the need to publish masses of material early post war which ultimately led to a lack of public understanding....mores the pity. __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

01-27-10, 06:15 PM	#79
psykopatsak Medic Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Grid AO27 Posts: 161 Downloads: 27 Uploads: 0	the thing that makes SH4 (im keeping to the PTO, not the game interface and such now) so extremly boring is that first you have to travel across a quarter of the globe jus to get close to enemy shipping. then at first you wont kill anything as your torpedoes suck, and then just leg it home, provided you werent attacked by a destroyer, in wich case you must dodge it first, and hope you dont accidentally reach crush depth while crash diving. the depth charges are so off that its not really an issue. late war you torpedo some random ships, and then dodge the occational destroyer, using the excact same boat to sink the excact same ships with now functioning torpedoes, and by now there are scarcly any destroyers left. then on your way home again! just a few more months!

01-27-10, 06:34 PM	#81
Kretschmer the IV Navy Dude Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Croatia Posts: 173 Downloads: 73 Uploads: 0	it's fascinating because the Kaleuns had balls. i read many books so far about Uboot Krieg and the crew and the Kaleuns were very brave soldiers. Often i imagine myself at their position, i would ** my pants. Like some Kaleun, i do not know his name any more, observed the corridor from gibraltar to the mediteran sea. Battleships with destroyerescorts and a carrier. He decided to attack.. One Uboot against all... I mean they were ****** heroes! And at the beginning of the war they behaved like knights, ritterlich, the helped out the survivors of wrecked ships. Gave them food, maps, maybe a compass, send a funktelegram on public frequency about survivors. But the war moved on and this ritterlichkeit vanished and all ended up .. you know the rest .. that's my opinion

01-27-10, 06:34 PM	#82
thruster Electrician's Mate Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 139 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	no disrespect to WW2 USN submarine service, but: whilst each service developed their boats to suit their area of ops, the uboats [esp the type 7 series] were the quintessential 'submarine' of the era. i suggest that the reason the US boats were allowed to do so well was due to the IJN ASW ineptitude and inefficiency, and the sheer size of the AO. a US boat makes a german Type 9 look like a stealth fighter, a US boat wouldnt survive its first contact in the atlantic even in 1940. whilst the US had a field day as the war progressed [biggest challenge actually finding targets], the uboats fought a totally aggressive adversary that became far more effective as the war progressed. personally, im saddened by the loss of all submariners, that said, the KM lost >3/4 of their uboat personnel, it became a gamble just to clear the bay of biscay and reach their AO. despite that they remained loyal to their mission to the very end. from a gaming perspective and the challenge in gameplay, i cannot see any point in modelling the PTO at the expense of perfecting the ATO, or even the Med.

01-27-10, 07:40 PM	#85
JU_88 Silent Hunter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: UK Posts: 3,803 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	I guess the facsination with U-boats, is due to their role in the most well-known/ most talked about submarine campaign in history. In a nut shell - Fame.

02-02-10, 12:26 PM	#90
karamazovnew The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 1,403 Downloads: 151 Uploads: 0	I love all subs, don't care about their origin. WW1: - check out the total tonnage that some of the Kaleuns achieved. Most were with the deck gun but still... rudimentary aiming, poor performance, slacky ASW, a great game potential. WW2: - japanese: fighting warships is hard, it would be a very tense campaign - americans: superb boats, amazing war-start. The big Pacific might be boring, but lying down in a crowded straight is never dull - germans: best enemy, best campaign progression from easy to suicide (well, not in SH5), most beautiful boats.