Two little details - easy to build up but huge affect

Rosencrantz · Joined: 16 Dec 2004 Posts: 280

Two things I would hope to see in SHIV:

1. Convoys using zig system
2. Boats behavior correct so that you can't stop your boat if submerged without loosing the depth control.

Number one:

Now in SHIII the hole hunt can done just like a turkey shot: Plot the targets course in 10 minutes (target will keep it's course) - raise ahead - dive - take your boat on normal course (90 degree track angle) - stop the engines - wait - shoot!).
I'm sure the system could be build up easily to count the basic course and after that, targets to use different zig codes you have to deal with. The zigging system should not be the easy "target is allways doing 30 degrees legs". There should be some variation in the system.

Number two:

If the boat would loose the depth control if under water speed is 0 (like it's in RL, usually), the only way to "sit down" is either to dive to the bottom or staying on surface. No more turkey shot pictured in the part one.

These two little things would take the hole tactical planning and approach prosedures also to a totally new level.

Opinitions?

-RC-

Threadfin · Joined: 23 Feb 2006 Posts: 44

Agree on the zig plans. Not every ship used one, so there should be some ships not zigging too. But overall, the Japanese ships certainly used zig plans. But these are true zig plans, not weaving like ships in SH3. a 30 degree port leg for 20 minutes, a 50 degree starboard zig for 15, and so on.

For the second point, no problem with that. US TDCs had position keepers, which inputted the sub's own movements into the torpedo solution calulation, so maintaining some speed will not make targeting more difficult, as it does in SH3.

To make things interesting, they should model scope shake at high speeds. In many accounts it's mentioned how they would need to slow to 3 or 4 knots for periscope observations, otherwise the scope picture would be blurred.

DeepSix · Joined: 27 Mar 2005 Posts: 802 Location: DB22

Second your ideas, Rosencrantz, plus Threadfin's additions. Thumbs Up

Loaf · Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:54 pm Post subject:

Didn't the convoys zig in SHI? I seem to recall that they did...

Convoys in SHII just went in all different directions and collided.

Driftwood · Joined: 04 Apr 2004 Posts: 289 Location: Western NC

Rosencrantz · Joined: 16 Dec 2004 Posts: 280

Driftwood wrote:

Trout · Joined: 23 Mar 2005 Posts: 90

1) THis would be a great feature if we had a command that allowed the boat to automatically maintain a shadowing distance from the target. It should also be a difficulty setting too as it will really screw up novices

2) Having read enough sub books I know that maintaining depth control was often very difficult. Boat speed, currents, temperatures, and most of all, damage state, skill level of the chief are all factors. While being attacked a boat could also have depth issues that would make it broach or dive suddenly downward out of control.

I know it is not the captains job to worry about this, but I think it would be fun from time to time to manualy adjust the ballast, flood tanks, or blow them a little while under attack.

I'm starting to see that a lot of us here dont find the game very challenging!
Trout

Rosencrantz · Joined: 16 Dec 2004 Posts: 280

To Trout, few notes:

I have to say, I don't agree with you about the trim procedures availible for player. I consider a) this might be asking maybe too much "building time" from Devs (they have to keep themselves between the limits given by the company)
and b) this is basicly irrelevant.

BUT, at least the boat should loose it's balance if it's underwater speed is 0. SHIII seems to lack this.

Second: Personally I can't understand "the casual player problem". Have you EVER heard about the game which is well done + not easy + that customers hate it? I haven't and I think it's just the companies excuse for not ready / easy / short / stupid gamy game. I think the more challenging the game is, the more popular it'll be. Sure, if our intention is to sell something to a 15 years old lad with just tiny nerves, the subsim is not our choice. Personally I don't believe subsim as a genre can ever deal with traditionally more popular war games. Just because, IMHO, subs are suchs a special subject most of the people just can't find as interesting. BUT, anyway, I think when we want to keep our old customers and maybe have some new also, the challenge is one of the main items then.

Wink

Greetings,

-RC-