Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Omelette On My Face--Silent Hunter 3

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:42:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
sub sim, and the developers deserve support.

I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.

But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
(so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)

But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)

I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
markers on your scope!

Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.

I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
I'll be sure it's really gone though.

It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
(two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.

The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
management never stops, just like RL.

The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
revenge . . . one can only hope.

So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>

Steve
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:42:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Steve Bartman wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:42:22 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
> wrote:
>
> Whoops! Forgot two things. It's only $39.95 USD at BestBuy. A game of
> this size would normally debut at $49.95. Second, it's DVD only. Not
a
> big problem for most people anymore, but don't be surprised.

You should be in advertising - nearly sold me on it :) 

Main problem for me is that it's almost guaranteed to not work on my
system (starforce ...)

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:50:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:42:22 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:

Whoops! Forgot two things. It's only $39.95 USD at BestBuy. A game of
this size would normally debut at $49.95. Second, it's DVD only. Not a
big problem for most people anymore, but don't be surprised.

Steve
Related resources
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 7:13:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On 30 Mar 2005 12:35:26 -0800, "eddysterckx@hotmail.com"
<eddysterckx@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>Steve Bartman wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:42:22 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Whoops! Forgot two things. It's only $39.95 USD at BestBuy. A game of
>> this size would normally debut at $49.95. Second, it's DVD only. Not
>a
>> big problem for most people anymore, but don't be surprised.
>
>You should be in advertising - nearly sold me on it :) 
>
>Main problem for me is that it's almost guaranteed to not work on my
>system (starforce ...)

Is it a SCSI issue?

Steve
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 7:35:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Yep..this one is worth all the starforce in the world:) 

Sailing at night through rough seas.....can you say DAS BOOT :) 

Very immersive considering it's still on a 2D monitor.

Nice touch on those cargo ships hulls breaking up as they go down:) 

51/2 stars.



"Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>
> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>
> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>
> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>
> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
> markers on your scope!
>
> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>
> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>
> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>
> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
> management never stops, just like RL.
>
> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>
> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>
> Steve
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 10:55:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

HR wrote:
> Yep..this one is worth all the starforce in the world:) 
>
> Sailing at night through rough seas.....can you say DAS BOOT :) 
>
> Very immersive considering it's still on a 2D monitor.
>
> Nice touch on those cargo ships hulls breaking up as they go down:) 
>
> 51/2 stars.

Is SH3 a WIN XP game only? (I'm still using ME)
March 31, 2005 12:54:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

What a great post...but I don't understand the Starforce reference. Can you
enlighten?

Rocket

"Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>
> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>
> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>
> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>
> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
> markers on your scope!
>
> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>
> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>
> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>
> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
> management never stops, just like RL.
>
> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>
> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>
> Steve
March 31, 2005 1:01:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Never mind. I found an article on Starforce and what I read is enough to
keep me away from SH3. And I was looking forward to it.

Rocket

"Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:cbmdneIvDOQdxdbfRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
> What a great post...but I don't understand the Starforce reference. Can
> you enlighten?
>
> Rocket
>
> "Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
> news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
>> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
>> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
>> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
>> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
>> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>>
>> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
>> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
>> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
>> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
>> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>>
>> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
>> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
>> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
>> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
>> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
>> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
>> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
>> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
>> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>>
>> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
>> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
>> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
>> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
>> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
>> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
>> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
>> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
>> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
>> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
>> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
>> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
>> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
>> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>>
>> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
>> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
>> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
>> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
>> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
>> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
>> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
>> markers on your scope!
>>
>> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
>> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
>> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
>> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
>> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>>
>> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
>> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
>> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
>> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
>> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>>
>> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
>> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
>> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>>
>> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
>> management never stops, just like RL.
>>
>> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
>> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
>> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
>> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
>> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>>
>> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
>> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
>> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>>
>> Steve
>
>
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 1:01:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

"Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:z8-dnUGw4KeRx9bfRVn-rg@adelphia.com...
> Never mind. I found an article on Starforce and what I read is enough to
> keep me away from SH3. And I was looking forward to it.
>
> Rocket
>
> "Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:cbmdneIvDOQdxdbfRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
>> What a great post...but I don't understand the Starforce reference. Can
>> you enlighten?
>>
>> Rocket
>>
>> "Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
>> news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
>>> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
>>> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
>>> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
>>> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
>>> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>>>
>>> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
>>> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
>>> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
>>> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
>>> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>>>
>>> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
>>> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
>>> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
>>> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
>>> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
>>> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
>>> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
>>> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
>>> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>>>
>>> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
>>> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
>>> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
>>> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
>>> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
>>> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
>>> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
>>> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
>>> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
>>> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
>>> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
>>> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
>>> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
>>> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>>>
>>> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
>>> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
>>> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
>>> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
>>> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
>>> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
>>> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
>>> markers on your scope!
>>>
>>> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
>>> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
>>> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
>>> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
>>> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>>>
>>> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
>>> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
>>> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
>>> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
>>> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>>>
>>> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
>>> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
>>> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>>>
>>> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
>>> management never stops, just like RL.
>>>
>>> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
>>> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
>>> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
>>> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
>>> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>>>
>>> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
>>> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
>>> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>>
>
>

My opposition to Starforce has been public and vehement. However, I've had
to tolerate it for reviews. My system has not suffered. SH3 is SO good I'd
re-consider my position if I were you.Rocket.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 1:31:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in
news:kh5m41lsegonbil9u7gcitb4gef5amv9a9@4ax.com:

>>
>>Main problem for me is that it's almost guaranteed to not work on my
>>system (starforce ...)
>
> Is it a SCSI issue?

DVD Re-Writer that is on the "black list" - and Alcohol 120%

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:28:12 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Windows XP

Upgrade. XP is far better than ME.


"Briarroot" <woodsyl@iwon.com> wrote in message
news:114mf6achhl9e36@corp.supernews.com...
> HR wrote:
>> Yep..this one is worth all the starforce in the world:) 
>>
>> Sailing at night through rough seas.....can you say DAS BOOT :) 
>>
>> Very immersive considering it's still on a 2D monitor.
>>
>> Nice touch on those cargo ships hulls breaking up as they go down:) 
>>
>> 51/2 stars.
>
> Is SH3 a WIN XP game only? (I'm still using ME)
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:04:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

You guys have almost sold me on buying a DVD player for my PC. Haven't
played a sub game since DOS.

Bob W

"Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>
> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>
> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>
> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>
> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
> markers on your scope!
>
> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>
> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>
> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>
> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
> management never stops, just like RL.
>
> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>
> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>
> Steve
March 31, 2005 3:08:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Thanks for the advice, Jim. I'll think about this. I was a huge SH fan
once, and would love to experience this new one, but would hate to
compromise an expensive system. Will have to mull this over.

Rocket

"James Cobb" <bismarck71@charter.net> wrote in message
news:HsJ2e.408$eo.335@fe04.lga...
>
> "Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:z8-dnUGw4KeRx9bfRVn-rg@adelphia.com...
>> Never mind. I found an article on Starforce and what I read is enough to
>> keep me away from SH3. And I was looking forward to it.
>>
>> Rocket
>>
>> "Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net> wrote in message
>> news:cbmdneIvDOQdxdbfRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
>>> What a great post...but I don't understand the Starforce reference. Can
>>> you enlighten?
>>>
>>> Rocket
>>>
>>> "Steve Bartman" <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fjql41ldcnq7c0gh77p0kvfav4q36s22mj@4ax.com...
>>>> OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
>>>> bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
>>>> were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
>>>> perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
>>>> sub sim, and the developers deserve support.
>>>>
>>>> I won't do a laundry list of pros and cons; they are available at
>>>> several forum sites like subsim.com. The game has a few glitches that
>>>> should be patched, and a few early (and late) features that were
>>>> dropped. There are vague rumors of an add-on pack to add wolfpacks for
>>>> example, an AI problem that was punted to get the game out.
>>>>
>>>> But what's there is stunning. Historical accuracy folk should be happy
>>>> (so far as my knowledge of U-boats go; I've already learned a bunch.)
>>>> Good tactics are rewarded as is good patrol discipline. The
>>>> crew-management element is a good start on what I've long envisioned.
>>>> It could be better, but it's a good start. ("Do I rest my best
>>>> look-out on the midwatch, or hope he can find me an easy night target
>>>> even though tired? Can my fuel situation stand me spending a day at 50
>>>> meters so the crew can get some sleep or do I risk driving them hard
>>>> and the reload taking too long during an attack due to fatigue?" Etc.)
>>>>
>>>> But what sold me was the graphics engine. I know gamers disparage
>>>> graphics, but here they make the game. I've been to sea on a big,
>>>> heavy nuke, so everything isn't the same, but one thing that is the
>>>> same is the frightening power of the sea, and no developer has ever
>>>> gotten it so right. Hard to put into words, but when you clear the
>>>> harbor (the game requires piloting and seaman's eye, a great
>>>> inclusion) and the boat begins meeting the swells, the spray starts
>>>> flying, and that slam (every bubblehead knows) begins as the bow is
>>>> tossed about by mere water . . . it's just visceral. Add great sea and
>>>> wind sounds, atmospherics like moon phases, realistic dawns and dusks,
>>>> biologics like birds acting as birds do near a harbor, and the game
>>>> just pulls you in. I actually spent thirty minutes last night just
>>>> standing on the bridge in a rainstorm watching the world (and my
>>>> lookouts--a CO's job is never done.)
>>>>
>>>> I've only done the naval academy and three short patrols in a Dugout
>>>> Type II to the Scottish coast, so the "good" weather and seas still
>>>> await once I can afford to fleet up to a type VII and go into the
>>>> Atlantic. I've sunk five ships in three trips (one neutral, oops), and
>>>> worked to find them. Gone is the interstate traffic of SH1. I've been
>>>> pounced by one DD, a corvette, and two armed trawlers, plus a dawn
>>>> aircraft patrol that nearly got me out of the rising sun. Bastids drop
>>>> markers on your scope!
>>>>
>>>> Lots of realism levels. Interiors are very detailed. The sinking and
>>>> explosion graphics are so varied I've yet to see two ships sink the
>>>> same way, and they behave like sinking ships too. Some flood, some
>>>> snap, some explode (depending on cargo), tankers burn, some roll over,
>>>> some don't. I could go on, but as I said, graphics heaven.
>>>>
>>>> I've played on both my laptop (128 meg video card) and my new desktop
>>>> gaming beast and neither shows any ill-effects from Starforce. I did a
>>>> lot of research on both sides of this obnox. technology and in the end
>>>> decided to chance it. So far nothing seems amiss. When I uninstall
>>>> I'll be sure it's really gone though.
>>>>
>>>> It's been a long time since a game grabbed me like this. Lt. Bartmann
>>>> (two 'n's just like great-grandpop <g>) is doing pretty well in late
>>>> 1939, but the good times won't last. If I see 1943 it'll be a miracle.
>>>>
>>>> The game has acceleration to make the dead times go by, but the crew
>>>> management never stops, just like RL.
>>>>
>>>> The devs want to make SH4 in the PTO, which was another reason I
>>>> decided to offer my revenue to Ubisoft. The idea of this engine
>>>> attached to the USN's campaign is just a little appealing. Sailing
>>>> past a burning Ford Island on 12/8/1941 bound for Empire waters and
>>>> revenge . . . one can only hope.
>>>>
>>>> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
>>>> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
>>>> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> My opposition to Starforce has been public and vehement. However, I've
> had to tolerate it for reviews. My system has not suffered. SH3 is SO
> good I'd re-consider my position if I were you.Rocket.
>
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 4:37:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On 30 Mar 2005 21:31:24 GMT, Eddy Sterckx <eddysterckx@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in
>news:kh5m41lsegonbil9u7gcitb4gef5amv9a9@4ax.com:
>
>>>
>>>Main problem for me is that it's almost guaranteed to not work on my
>>>system (starforce ...)
>>
>> Is it a SCSI issue?
>
>DVD Re-Writer that is on the "black list" - and Alcohol 120%

Ah. I see now.

Steve
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 4:40:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:04:28 GMT, "Bob W."
<bleew@columbus.dropthis.rr.com> wrote:

>You guys have almost sold me on buying a DVD player for my PC. Haven't
>played a sub game since DOS.

They've gotten better. <g>

I started on Microprose's AppleIIe version of Silent Service (I think;
it was 1984 or so.) Pretty much wire-frame graphics. Also Gato on the
original IBM PC before I got my trusty 286.

Get the DVD player. "The Incredibles" looks nice up close.

Steve
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 4:55:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:08:24 -0500, "Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net>
wrote:

>Thanks for the advice, Jim. I'll think about this. I was a huge SH fan
>once, and would love to experience this new one, but would hate to
>compromise an expensive system. Will have to mull this over.
>
>Rocket

Let me echo Jim. It's worth it if you think it's a risk, and so far
there's no effect on either of my systems. My new desktop is four days
old (as I said, it's a gaming beast) and SH3 was the first thing I
installed after virus protection.

On theoretical grounds I'm with G.; I hate these new protection
schemes. I pay for my games. Steam/HL2 was too over the top. I will
not play a game that requires real-time Net nannyism to play solo.
Starforce is a different approach, but, yeah, I really dislike it. For
any game I wasn't 150% into topic-wise I'd say nope.

But this once I buckled.

Last night I restarted a career in a different flotilla, in a Type
VII. Patrols west of Ireland, and man, the Atlantic is just like I
remember. Waves pooping the bridge cockpit, driving rain for days on
end, swells exposing the screw. On one attack I had to time torpedo
launch because the tubes were in mid-air on the rise! Without radar
(yet) night lookouts are key, but you have no hope outside maybe 4000
meters of seeing even the biggest ship. Night looks like night in this
game.

Coming home to Kiel through the English Channel I went topside in
heavy rain after noticing my lookouts were fatiguing very rapidly.
They looked like wet rats. I went to crew-management, relieved the
watch, and the new guys came up in Gorton FishGuy oilskins. The
fatigue rate seemed to slow down. Maybe my imagination, but it's those
sorts of touches that keep me exploring this game's edges.

Steve
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:08:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

HR wrote:
>
> "Briarroot" <woodsyl@iwon.com> wrote in message
> news:114mf6achhl9e36@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>Is SH3 a WIN XP game only? (I'm still using ME)
>
>
>Windows XP
>
>Upgrade. XP is far better than ME.

WIN ME has always been a stable operating system for me, so I've never
paid any attention to the "XP is better" argument. However, it
appears that I must now upgrade after all, since several games on my
'must buy' list are XP only - damn it! :-(




*** top posting corrected ***
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:36:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

BTW this game is full of surprises. Just sail into New York's harbor, and
you will find that the devs really built the '40s New York in the sim,
Statue of Liberty, piers and mid-XX Century skyline included (like in a
Flight Sim title). I'm now wondering if other famous places are implemented
with the same care for detail.

Being chased by a destroyer is truly scary, BTW. "Silent Hill"-level scary.
The ship's propellers stop moving, everything is quiet, and then, suddenly,
the boat is rocked by explosions, screams and spraying valves. During one
mission the lights went totally out, and I had to endure one hour of depth
charges while standing still on the bottom of the North Sea in total
darkness. To add to realism, you can move inside your boat in real time,
like in a FPS, and every U-Boat class has her personalized interiors.

This game is truly a classic, IMHO. It can be improved, and I hope that the
devs will patch the outstanding issues, but the gameplay and the realism are
all there. And the dynamic campaign really makes the difference. SHIII
bought me back to the times when I played from-dusk-till-dawn at "Red Storm
Rising", "Pirates", "Gunship" and (more recently) "Longbow 2".

And, yes, I'm already ready to shell money for a Pacific-Theatre sequel :o )
The very best option would be a sequel that can be installed over the
original, so you could play in one, immense world, choosing your alliance
and sailing around (with the opportunity to fight with American subs in the
Atlantic, too). The map in the scen editor, BTW, already covers the whole
world, and a look at the dynamic campaign file shows naval activity even in
the Indian Ocean, and near Australia and Indonesia, even if you have to sail
down there by yourself.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:36:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:36:31 +0200, "Vincenzo Beretta"
<reckall@hotmail.com> wrote:

>BTW this game is full of surprises. Just sail into New York's harbor, and
>you will find that the devs really built the '40s New York in the sim,
>Statue of Liberty, piers and mid-XX Century skyline included (like in a
>Flight Sim title). I'm now wondering if other famous places are implemented
>with the same care for detail.

I'm waiting for a chance at a Type IX's range so I can look into
Norfolk VA for just that reason. My old stomping grounds.

>Being chased by a destroyer is truly scary, BTW. "Silent Hill"-level scary.
>The ship's propellers stop moving, everything is quiet, and then, suddenly,
>the boat is rocked by explosions, screams and spraying valves. During one
>mission the lights went totally out, and I had to endure one hour of depth
>charges while standing still on the bottom of the North Sea in total
>darkness. To add to realism, you can move inside your boat in real time,
>like in a FPS, and every U-Boat class has her personalized interiors.

I would have liked the chance to go aft to engineering, but there's no
good gameplay reason. Just nice candy.

>And, yes, I'm already ready to shell money for a Pacific-Theatre sequel :o )
>The very best option would be a sequel that can be installed over the
>original, so you could play in one, immense world, choosing your alliance
>and sailing around (with the opportunity to fight with American subs in the
>Atlantic, too). The map in the scen editor, BTW, already covers the whole
>world, and a look at the dynamic campaign file shows naval activity even in
>the Indian Ocean, and near Australia and Indonesia, even if you have to sail
>down there by yourself.

I saw the ship recognition book library included Oz, Brazil, etc. and
wondered why. Haven't touched the editor yet.

Steve
March 31, 2005 9:31:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>
> Steve

Well! Ya Sold Me! I want it...

Too bad it's DVD only. All I've got is a 3.2Ghz HT P-4 with a gig of
memory and a CD-ROM drive.

Bummer

--
Werewolf

Peace is Good.
Freedom is BETTER!
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:20:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:42:22 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:

>OK, OK, I know what I said. Nazis bad, blah, blah, blah. Starforce
>bad, ditto. Rare is it on Usenet that someone will admit that they
>were horribly wrong, but I must in support of this game. It's not
>perfect, but it's a chasm-leap over any previous WWII
>sub sim, and the developers deserve support.

<snip>

Yep,it's better than AotD in nearly every way,which makes it the best
sub sim made to this point.It gives you a tremendous sense of
intercepting and stalking a lone ship or convoy,and you can make it
just about as hardcore or lightweight as you like.The only real
criticism I have of it is that the crew management is kind of
annoying.

There are minor bugs,to be sure,but I had no trouble with copy
protection,or anything else.Before they move on to SH4,I hope they go
ahead with a rumored expansion,adding wolfpacks,Milch Cows,etc.

This is game of the year material.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:20:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:20:31 GMT, Michael A. Oberly <kitch@SPAMOFF
columbus.rr.com> wrote:

>Yep,it's better than AotD in nearly every way,

DVD vs. floppies. <g>

which makes it the best
>sub sim made to this point.It gives you a tremendous sense of
>intercepting and stalking a lone ship or convoy,and you can make it
>just about as hardcore or lightweight as you like.The only real
>criticism I have of it is that the crew management is kind of
>annoying.

I find that the best part after the graphics. Having dealt in RL with
sailors and their many quirks I like role-playing trade-offs a bit.
Especially with the bridge crew staying on top of fatigue makes a big
tactical difference.

Fuel is the limiting endurance factor, not food (the hanging meats and
cheeses in control seem to not be consumed), but I've noticed fatigue
rates accelerate as you get into the third week at sea, or so. I may
test this. Just go to some quiet spot, go to All Stop to zero fuel
rate, and accelerate time to max for a couple of months. See if
there's a limit built in.

If this in the manual tell me to RTFM. I still haven't done so.

Steve
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:37:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:31:01 -0600, Werewolf <nunya@no-way.net> wrote:

>
>> So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
>> one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
>> coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>>
>> Steve
>
>Well! Ya Sold Me! I want it...
>
>Too bad it's DVD only. All I've got is a 3.2Ghz HT P-4 with a gig of
>memory and a CD-ROM drive.

I believe there's a download-only version that doesn't need a DVD
drive, but it has a 5 install restriction.

Steve
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 11:07:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in
news:7sgo41tffrgn9l2ncoeok947034p8t3qo0@4ax.com:

> I started on Microprose's AppleIIe version of Silent Service (I think;
> it was 1984 or so.) Pretty much wire-frame graphics.

Not at all - beautifull 4 color cga graphics (cyan, magenta, white, black)
- destroyers were 3 pixels and you could see them turn towards you,
torpedoes were 2 pixels - great times :) 

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 11:07:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On 31 Mar 2005 19:07:19 GMT, Eddy Sterckx <eddysterckx@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in
>news:7sgo41tffrgn9l2ncoeok947034p8t3qo0@4ax.com:
>
>> I started on Microprose's AppleIIe version of Silent Service (I think;
>> it was 1984 or so.) Pretty much wire-frame graphics.
>
>Not at all - beautifull 4 color cga graphics (cyan, magenta, white, black)
>- destroyers were 3 pixels and you could see them turn towards you,
>torpedoes were 2 pixels - great times :) 

I was playing on a green Apple mono screen. <g>

You're right about the graphics. I was thinking about MP's original
F-15 Strike Fighter. Played it in the same era. "Landing" involved
flying over the base below 2000 feet or something. I still thought it
was magic. Then they brought out Stealth Fighter for my new (amber
mono) IBM 286 and nearly destroyed my marriage.

Steve
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:14:37 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Yes but silent service was far superior on the C64 (as wasn't stealth
fighter) with its 16 colors:) 


"Eddy Sterckx" <eddysterckx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns962AD5110DF38eddysterckxhotmailco@216.143.170.20...
> Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote in
> news:7sgo41tffrgn9l2ncoeok947034p8t3qo0@4ax.com:
>
>> I started on Microprose's AppleIIe version of Silent Service (I think;
>> it was 1984 or so.) Pretty much wire-frame graphics.
>
> Not at all - beautifull 4 color cga graphics (cyan, magenta, white, black)
> - destroyers were 3 pixels and you could see them turn towards you,
> torpedoes were 2 pixels - great times :) 
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 11:10:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:05:37 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:


>Fuel is the limiting endurance factor, not food (the hanging meats and
>cheeses in control seem to not be consumed), but I've noticed fatigue
>rates accelerate as you get into the third week at sea, or so. I may
>test this. Just go to some quiet spot, go to All Stop to zero fuel
>rate, and accelerate time to max for a couple of months. See if
>there's a limit built in.
>
>If this in the manual tell me to RTFM. I still haven't done so.
>

I haven't tested this,but one thing to keep in mind is that crew
fatigue stays at its current state if you're in time acceleration of
64x or greater.So,if you have a rested crew,and then go into time
acceleration for a while,you're still good when a sighting is made.

I don't mind so much how the fatigue is modeled,I just would prefer a
little less micro-management.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 1:21:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:37:17 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:


>I believe there's a download-only version that doesn't need a DVD
>drive, but it has a 5 install restriction.
>
>Steve

Someone on simhq said there is no 5 install limit. All the other games
at D2D don't have a 5 limit install so why would SHIII?
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 1:24:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Werewolf wrote:
>
> Well! Ya Sold Me! I want it...
>
> Too bad it's DVD only. All I've got is a 3.2Ghz HT P-4 with a gig of
> memory and a CD-ROM drive.
>
> Bummer
>

Think about springing for a DVD drive. You can find DVD-ROM drives
for sale online for around $30. Installation takes about 15 minutes
as you can simply replace the old CD-ROM with the new DVD. No special
operating systems drivers are required. Your new DVD drive will read
all your old CDs, and you'll be ready for future DVD-only releases.
All in all, it's a cheap, easy and worthwhile hardware upgrade.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 2:02:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:10:03 GMT, Michael A. Oberly <kitch@SPAMOFF
columbus.rr.com> wrote:


>I haven't tested this,but one thing to keep in mind is that crew
>fatigue stays at its current state if you're in time acceleration of
>64x or greater.So,if you have a rested crew,and then go into time
>acceleration for a while,you're still good when a sighting is made.

Didn't know that. Thanks. Manual now 50% read. Setting up/transferring
to new PC is eating my spare time. <g>

>I don't mind so much how the fatigue is modeled,I just would prefer a
>little less micro-management.

See, I'd like more. I want to manage logistics too. Former Supply
Officer, so it fits I suppose. <g>

Steve
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:23:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:21:18 -0800, Redmond du Barrymond
<redmond@STUFFIT.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:37:17 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>I believe there's a download-only version that doesn't need a DVD
>>drive, but it has a 5 install restriction.
>>
>>Steve
>
>Someone on simhq said there is no 5 install limit. All the other games
>at D2D don't have a 5 limit install so why would SHIII?

I don't have details, just repeating what's on the forums. d/l is an
option if one doesn't have or want a DVD drive.

Steve
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:03:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:24:27 -0500, Briarroot <woodsyl@iwon.com> wrote:
: Think about springing for a DVD drive. You can find DVD-ROM drives

I have two questions, please. The first regards the quality of the
SH3 printed manual: Is it worth getting the physical copy for the
manual?

On DVD replacement, in that there appears to be zillions of formats,
is support for DVD-ROM the key for the software side? (assuming I'm not
into movies and audio, which I'm not). TIA
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:03:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:03:07 GMT, hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard Goldstein)
wrote:

>On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:24:27 -0500, Briarroot <woodsyl@iwon.com> wrote:
> : Think about springing for a DVD drive. You can find DVD-ROM drives
>
>I have two questions, please. The first regards the quality of the
>SH3 printed manual: Is it worth getting the physical copy for the
>manual?

The manual is about average for these days. Could be better. A lot of
space devoted to class differences that are available in-game, and not
enough to nooks and crannies of the interface. Seems like a few things
were also changed after manual went to print.

More important is a separate printed map with air cover zones and
convoy routes. Invaluable for voyage planning and patrolling for max
targets. Also has a keyboard hot-key insert that's very useful while
learning. Three printed pieces is pretty rare these days.

Steve
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:03:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:03:07 GMT, hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard Goldstein)
wrote:


>On DVD replacement, in that there appears to be zillions of formats,
>is support for DVD-ROM the key for the software side? (assuming I'm not
>into movies and audio, which I'm not). TIA

If it's just a DVD reader drive then they all support movies and
music, they work just like a cdrom drive except they can read DVD's
too. When you get into the different formats is when you are buying a
recordable DVD drive. One thing to check for when buying though to
make sure it gets through initialising copy protected games is to make
sure it supports RAW read mode. Not all drives support that and that
is the key to avoiding problems with copy protection. Liteon drives
usually support RAW mode.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 9:16:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 13:23:31 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:


>I don't have details, just repeating what's on the forums. d/l is an
>option if one doesn't have or want a DVD drive.
>
>Steve

Yea, I read that on the forums too but someone that actually purchased
the digital download version says it's not true.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 10:00:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:03:07 GMT, hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard Goldstein)
wrote:

>I have two questions, please. The first regards the quality of the
>SH3 printed manual: Is it worth getting the physical copy for the
>manual?

The manual is the weakest thing in the game.Just about everything is
covered in it,but often in the most superficial manner.As Steve
mentioned,the map which comes with the game is more helpful than the
manual.In my opinion,you'd be just as well off with the pdf form of
the manual.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 11:10:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Howard Goldstein wrote:
>
> On DVD replacement, in that there appears to be zillions of formats,
> is support for DVD-ROM the key for the software side? (assuming I'm not
> into movies and audio, which I'm not). TIA

There's only one format for DVD-ROM (that's a read-only drive), so
Werewolf wouldn't run into any problems by simply swapping out his
CD-ROM and replacing it with a DVD-ROM. If you have a CD burner then
I'd recommend keeping it and adding a DVD-ROM in *addition* to it.
April 2, 2005 12:39:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:00:08 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:


>
>I'm waiting for a chance at a Type IX's range so I can look into
>Norfolk VA for just that reason. My old stomping grounds.
>
Yep, I'm playing it one step/boat type/year at a time in career mode
and using time compression sparingly. It will be weeks before I have
a Type IX. I want that degree of experience.
I was driving back to base and a huge storm blew up w/ lightning
strikes all around after awhile a heavy rain began. I took about 30 or
40 screenshots trying to get one w/ a lightning strike. I liked SHII
but this game is several times as realistic, surprising and immersive
in the game play and management.
surfer
April 2, 2005 2:04:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Steve Bartman wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:31:01 -0600, Werewolf <nunya@no-way.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>So, if sims appeal to hard-core wargamers I'd say don't bypass this
>>>one due only to the Starforce issue. It really is a quality design and
>>>coding job. And it (apparently) won't turn you into a Nazi. <g>
>>>
>>>Steve
>>
>>Well! Ya Sold Me! I want it...
>>
>>Too bad it's DVD only. All I've got is a 3.2Ghz HT P-4 with a gig of
>>memory and a CD-ROM drive.
>
>
> I believe there's a download-only version that doesn't need a DVD
> drive, but it has a 5 install restriction.
>
> Steve

That works for me.
Would one DL from Ubi Soft's site or somewhere else.

Link?

--
Werewolf

Peace is Good.
Freedom is BETTER!
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 2:32:25 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 10:04:44 -0600, Werewolf <nunya@no-way.net> wrote:


>That works for me.
>Would one DL from Ubi Soft's site or somewhere else.
>
>Link?

http://www.direct2drive.com/
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 6:21:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 10:06:35 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote:
: More important is a separate printed map with air cover zones and
: convoy routes. Invaluable for voyage planning and patrolling for max
: targets. Also has a keyboard hot-key insert that's very useful while
: learning. Three printed pieces is pretty rare these days.

Too rare, yes :(  Is it a big old chart? And do you know whether the
map and hot key insert are reproduced on the DVD (which hopefully
would included somewhere in the download....)? On a weekend like this
one I might forgo the drive to the mall and staples for the physical
package and a DVD drive if I can print these important bits out here
at home...

But a good chart is definitely a draw. It's been a long time since I
bought gaming software with a decent map/chart of some kind
(Tornado and GTAIII are memorable)
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 10:28:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

Thank you Redmond and Briar for your comments regarding the DVD drive
and for setting me straight on not needing to worry about the other
formats for read-only use.

Even staples has these drives now, hopefully their ~$30 one has raw read
ability for doing battle with the copy protection <spit> schemes.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 1:07:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 14:21:33 GMT, Howard Goldstein <hgoldste@mpcs.com> wrote:
: would included somewhere in the download....)? On a weekend like this
: one I might forgo the drive to the mall and staples for the physical
: package and a DVD drive if I can print these important bits out here
: at home...

(following up to myself in a most gauche manner).. and now it's too
late. Purchased it online, but it is disheartening watching 2 hours
left on an estimated 5 hour download. Should have started it when
there was more of a weekend left.

I suppose though I should thank gamespy and my DSL NSP for letting me
get my taxes done though. Are there any recommended forums in
addition to this usenet-based one with good SH3 info, particularly for
beginners? TIA
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 2:21:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:39:54 -0500, SurferX <surferx@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:00:08 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I'm waiting for a chance at a Type IX's range so I can look into
>>Norfolk VA for just that reason. My old stomping grounds.
>>
>Yep, I'm playing it one step/boat type/year at a time in career mode
>and using time compression sparingly. It will be weeks before I have
>a Type IX. I want that degree of experience.
> I was driving back to base and a huge storm blew up w/ lightning
>strikes all around after awhile a heavy rain began. I took about 30 or
>40 screenshots trying to get one w/ a lightning strike. I liked SHII
>but this game is several times as realistic, surprising and immersive
>in the game play and management.
>surfer

New career. Third patrol from Kiel, near Scapa Flow. Three weeks of
solid rain, waves, and 15 m/sec. wind. Bridge watch under three feet
of water much of the time. Didn't see one ship. Back to base with a
full load of torpedoes. Yeah, and just a bit of lightning too.

Steve
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 2:32:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 14:21:33 GMT, hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard Goldstein)
wrote:

>Too rare, yes :(  Is it a big old chart?

It's large, yes. Not near it currently, but close to 3x2 feet? Full
color, heavy clayed paper.

And do you know whether the
>map and hot key insert are reproduced on the DVD (which hopefully
>would included somewhere in the download....)?

Don't know. Too busy playing to explore the DVD. This week I may look
in at the editor though.

Steve
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 5:30:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:50:58 -0500, Werewolf <nunya@no-way.net> wrote:


>Now if they'd just come out with a Pacific theater version,

Ubisoft have already announced a SH4 and I expect it will be the
Pacific theater.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 12:49:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 10:29:41 -0500, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com> wrote:
: I haven't looked at the disk for a .pdf. Does the download .pdf have
: the map with convoy routes and air-cover zones?

It does, although I think I need a magnifying glass or a way to make a
mosiac into the size you mentioned in the other article you posted
today. That's one big chart to print out on a teeny 8.5x11!
April 5, 2005 10:27:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

>I haven't looked at the disk for a .pdf. Does the download .pdf have
>the map with convoy routes and air-cover zones? If not you need to
>find a way to get a copy. Contacts will go up 400% if you're in right
>corner of the right square. The subsim.com forums have a few threads
>with likely areas, but the map is key to a good score.

No map with routes and air cover zones. I'll visit there.

On the Ubi official site they imply there is also a hardcopy ID manual
that comes with the game. I almost feel a bit ripped off now going thru
D2D but what is one to do?
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 12:20:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:55:51 -0600, Steve Bartman <sbartman@visi.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:08:24 -0500, "Rocket" <rocket1@adelphia.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the advice, Jim. I'll think about this. I was a huge SH fan
>>once, and would love to experience this new one, but would hate to
>>compromise an expensive system. Will have to mull this over.
>>
>>Rocket
>
>Let me echo Jim. It's worth it if you think it's a risk, and so far
>there's no effect on either of my systems. My new desktop is four days
>old (as I said, it's a gaming beast) and SH3 was the first thing I
>installed after virus protection.

When the 'risk' is that it might not run on your system because it
doesn't approve of certain hardware or software, I tend to be pretty
careful about what I buy. ... although you almost sold me on SH3 <g>.

>On theoretical grounds I'm with G.; I hate these new protection
>schemes. I pay for my games. Steam/HL2 was too over the top. I will
>not play a game that requires real-time Net nannyism to play solo.
>Starforce is a different approach, but, yeah, I really dislike it. For
>any game I wasn't 150% into topic-wise I'd say nope.
>

I find myself, for the first time in about 20 years, running a game on
my PC that I didn't pay for. After trying for a day to get Kohan 2's
copy protection working on my system or finding a no-CD crack that
worked for WIN ME, I went through the hassles of returning the
software at a store that has a 'no return' policy.

Fast foward a couple of months and I happen to see that it's still
installed on my HD. I download a no-CD crack that works this time
around so now I have an illegal copy of the game. ... and I don't feel
the least bit guilty about running it. <shrug>

From there, it's not really a big leap to downloading Warez versions
of certain games (with anal copy protection) and I find myself more
and more tempted these days. It's not even a matter of money as much
as them wasting my time with this bullshit.

Rgds, Frank
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 1:47:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)

On 5 Apr 2005 06:27:43 -0700, "Werewolf" <werewolf1326@cox.net> wrote:

>>I haven't looked at the disk for a .pdf. Does the download .pdf have
>>the map with convoy routes and air-cover zones? If not you need to
>>find a way to get a copy. Contacts will go up 400% if you're in right
>>corner of the right square. The subsim.com forums have a few threads
>>with likely areas, but the map is key to a good score.
>
>No map with routes and air cover zones. I'll visit there.

It will increase your enjoyment if you can get a scan of the map or
something.

>On the Ubi official site they imply there is also a hardcopy ID manual
>that comes with the game. I almost feel a bit ripped off now going thru
>D2D but what is one to do?

No ID manual. Maybe they inserted the Museum area to save on printing
and relieve the downloaders.

The paper manual is 58 pages of content and a lot of pictures. Nothing
that couldn't be pdfed. I don't look at it during play. The hotkey
insert I do occasionally, less than at the start.

Steve
--
www.thepaxamsolution.com
Related resources
!