Going between SH3 & SH4

[captainFlunky]

I've gotten in the habit of doing one patrol in SH3 and then doing the next in SH4...makes for some interesting gameplay.

First of their is the whole muscle memory thing- you're frantically clicking the bridge icon in SH4 thinking for some reason your watch officer will pop up, or shoving the mouse to the top of the screen in map view waiting for the drop down menu.

But what really is interesting is the difference in tactics that is required. By chance, I happen to be in 1943 in both SH3 and SH4 campaigns, and in the atlantic I'm terrified to run on the surface at all, while in the pacific I feel cocky enough to get within 1500 of a convoy at night (not taskforces though, because of the DD's and their millimetric radar they ripped off from an AH-64 Longbow)

And boy, are those subs different! Gotta say I'm liking the US subs more and more (Wow! thats a lotta torpedoes! I can go HOW fast?)

Anyone else doing something similar?

[ReM]

Are you using unmodded 1.3 SH III vs unmodded 1.2 SH IV?

If not the comparison is lame.....

[Iron Budokan]

The comparison is valid, especially considering the "muscle memory" problem. I can't say how many times I slid my mouse pointer to the left of the screen in SH4 waiting for the icon bar to slide out! :rotfl:

Tactics are different, too, up to a degree. And you gotta love the surface speed of those U.S. boats!

[Storabrun]

Originally Posted by captainFlunky

And boy, are those subs different! Gotta say I'm liking the US subs more and more (Wow! thats a lotta torpedoes! I can go HOW fast?)

Anyone else doing something similar?

Yeah, but that's the only upsides of the US subs compared to uboats. Torpedoes had problems for both sides early in the war, but the ones in SH4 seem worse and you don't have much to look forward to when it comes to more advanced torpedoes. Everything else is worse in the subs. Diving to 120 meters will get you killed sooner or later, and crash diving takes forever. The position keeper sucks in it's current state, and I would prefer the TDC of SH3 even if it's fixed. It just sucks to have to repeat every step of the targeting procedure for every ship in a convoy, it takes forever. Changing target for the PK always messes up the AOB even if all targets have the same course. Btw, is the submerged range supposed to be this low in SH4? A Gato can get about 1/4-1/6 of the range you had in the early uboats. Even with 3-4 knots and ahead 1/3 the batteries are empty in less than 10 hours.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by ReM

Are you using unmodded 1.3 SH III vs unmodded 1.2 SH IV?

If not the comparison is lame.....

Wow.. uhh.. well just wow.

I cant tell you the number of times I hit F12 expecting to get the exterior view only to open the log

[mookiemookie]

I remember the very first criticism I had of SH4, the very first thing I noticed, was that they changed the hotkeys for no bloody good reason!

I have praised CCIP's name on many occasions for his keyboard mod that returns everything to SH3 defaults

[nfitzsimmons]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

I remember the very first criticism I had of SH4, the very first thing I noticed, was that they changed the hotkeys for no bloody good reason!

I have praised CCIP's name on many occasions for his keyboard mod that returns everything to SH3 defaults

Sure they had a bloody good reason: Because!

[Chock]

I'm using SH3 and SH4. SH3 with the GWX mod and SH4 with only one or two tweeks of my own (pretty much standard SH4 though, as I'm waiting to see what befalls us when the next patch comes out, if it does).

I don't think the comparison is lame at all, as all you are really doing is comparing the tactics of a fleet boat versus one which was typically meant for a short duration coastal patrol, but both of which ended up being used outside of their original intended purpose.

Most military vehicles end up having their role altered or changed when they are in service for a long time and the ability of a machine to cope with having to take on differing tactical roles is one of the things that determines how good and versatile a platform it is. The B-17 Flying Fortress was originally conceived as a maritime patrol bomber for example, which is not the role it became famous in.

Also, as people have noted, there is the switch you have to make on keyboard assignments. Fortunately for me, I'm used to doing that, as I spend all day training people in applications on Apple Macs, and then come home and start using a PC. So if you think keyboard assignment differences are confusing, try constantly having your alt key's position moved and effectively having two different control keys!

Although I was initially a little puzzled about why the keyboard assignments were altered on what is effectively a souped-up SH3 in a different theatre of war, I can see a kind of fuzzy logic about it: It conveys the notion that you are in a boat designed by a different nation with dissimilar appoaches to how stuff worked or was implemented.

Oddly enough, one of the worst submarine films of all time (U-571) is the only movie that's ever really addressed this, when the US crew are briefly puzzled about where all the controls are in a sub unfamiliar to them. However, they do seem to manage to work it out rather quickly in a manner more befitting an episode of the A-Team rather than a serious sub movie (I half expected the Dah-de dah dah! A-Team music to kick in when I was watching that part of U-571 )

Got to love having more tubes and more speed on the Yank subs, but I do find myself wishing for the speed and manueverability of the Jerry stuff.

It's also interesting to note the changes that are highlighted over the period of several years of development. Nobody could fail to miss the massive advances the Germans managed with regard to sub design and equipment in comparison to the almost plodding progress of US development. It sometimes makes you wonder how the Germans actually managed to lose the war, when they had all those great ideas such as the Type 21 sub, hydraulic loading, acoustic and pattern running torpedoes, jet fighters, cruise missiles, guided ballistic missiles, stealth technology, superguns, assault rifles etc etc.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by captainFlunky

I've gotten in the habit of doing one patrol in SH3 and then doing the next in SH4...makes for some interesting gameplay.

Five years ago I was doing the same thing with AOD and SH1...almost. I started two careers in AOD and continued with them and other, newer ones until December '41. I then added Silent Hunter with two careers, one out of Pearl and one in Manila. I juggled my patrols by date, keeping a running record of all of them. I was in 1943 when SH3 came out and ruined it all.

Once I have my computer up and running I'll likely be starting all over with the new games. I figure by the time I get to the end of 1941 SH4 will be pretty much perfected.

[Storabrun]

Originally Posted by Chock

It sometimes makes you wonder how the Germans actually managed to lose the war, when they had all those great ideas such as the Type 21 sub, hydraulic loading, acoustic and pattern running torpedoes, jet fighters, cruise missiles, guided ballistic missiles, stealth technology, superguns, assault rifles etc etc.

Germany losing the war shouldn't be a puzzle to anyone considering the differences in manpower, economy, natural resources and industrial capacity, between the Allies and the Axis. I think you knew that already

But I guess we should be thankful that Germany was a nation with some 60-70 million citizens and not a real giant like the Soviet Union or USA with their huge populations and vast natural resources.

[Hartmann]

i started a career in sh1 for comparasion porpouses with sh4

[Bane]

Originally Posted by captainFlunky

I've gotten in the habit of doing one patrol in SH3 and then doing the next in SH4...makes for some interesting gameplay.

Same here, sorta. I've had SH4 installed for a bit and have completed a couple of patrols. I reinstalled SH3 and began my first GWX patrol last night. I can see myself jumping back and forth between the two.

The difference that made itself immediately obvious was the frames per second:

SH3 + GWX at max graphic settings, 6x AA, 16x AF: 100 fps average

SH4 at close to max graphic settings, 0x AA, 0x AF: 30 fps average

It's amazing what can change in only two years. My motherboard is maxed out too. More fps = build another computer for me.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Storabrun

Germany losing the war shouldn't be a puzzle to anyone considering the differences in manpower, economy, natural resources and industrial capacity, between the Allies and the Axis. I think you knew that already

But I guess we should be thankful that Germany was a nation with some 60-70 million citizens and not a real giant like the Soviet Union or USA with their huge populations and vast natural resources.

Wow how did we get here from there ?

I was going to launch into the facts about an Insane murderious dictator but ... nah not worth it.

[Chock]

Yup, ther are a lot of factors in the Nazis losing, not least of which was in fact the Nazi party itself. Like most dictatorships, there's a lot of political mistrust and favourites played. Much of which spilled over into deciding which industrial projects got the go ahead and which played second fiddle.

I think most people know that the Kriegsmarine was not exactly a hotbed of Nazi fervour, which probably played a large part in it not getting more modern equipment sooner and in greater quantities.

And I guess we can all be thankful for that.

Back on the original topic however, or at least a tangent of it. I think comparing SH1 with SH4 could turn out to be quite depressing, in that it might point up how little things have moved on, barring the eye candy