PDA

View Full Version : There should be a "no GPS" option for true realism



S VIIC_41
05-08-2005, 10:09 AM
Hell, I'm not big into realism myself, I play at about 62% but really one of the biggest lacks of realism (lacks of realism... does that make sense? o_O) is the "GPS Map Screen" that shows you exactly where you are with 100% accuracy.

It'd be cool if you could remove the U-boat from the map and then take sextant readings now and then that'd be automatically added to the map. Or manually added.

I've heard people ask for a sextant before but really I'm surprised that there isn't more discussion from the "realism purists" about the biggest blatant lack of realism in the game.

Meh, I probably wouldn't really use it but, after I finish my current career I plan to start again with 100% realism, maybe in '43 because it takes an awful long time to get through...

durex2000
05-08-2005, 10:24 AM
Do you have any idea how complicated real navigation (in reality, with sextant, no GPS) is ? That would require precide modelling of the sun, venus, moon, stars etc. ! Beside that you need for each day tables with the appropriate values ? and the calculations ? Far away from beeing trivial.
greetings
durex

S VIIC_41
05-08-2005, 10:28 AM
Do you have any idea how complicated real navigation (in reality, with sextant, no GPS) is ? That would require precide modelling of the sun, venus, moon, stars etc. ! Beside that you need for each day tables with the appropriate values ? and the calculations ? Far away from beeing trivial.
greetings
durex

They already have a pretty good model of the stars I hear but alright... how about you have to tell your navigation officer to take a reading?

Thereby removing the need for ACTUALLY correct stars and not needing sin tables beside you.

Like telling the weapons officer to make a solution.

That'd work pretty well I think...

Well it's just "100% Realism" is a bit of a complete absolute sham when you have a GPS of a map with you.

irimi
05-08-2005, 11:20 AM
... And it would be far more realistic to have a real Mercator map for such a navigation ! I don't know why they've chosen a basic XY projection (each lat/lon degree has the same size on the map)... It would have been as easy to make and use a real Mercator map, and it would have been more convenient ! But in this game, it's assumed that the Earth is flat I suppose... That's a real problem to implement a good navigation engine...

U-49
05-08-2005, 11:30 AM
S VIIC_41:
"GPS Map Screen" that shows you exactly where you are with 100% accuracy. I've posted something very similar on another board. I too would like the GPS taken off my boat. You're not alone.

Maj_Death
05-08-2005, 12:20 PM
Well, first of all you have a navigator, that is what he is there for (duh!). But that aside, as said it is a VERY big deal to add. Yes the stars, planets and sun are there as I can recognize a few constillations but I seriously doubt they have planetary motion modeled. Also, this type of navigation is a very big deal to do. Unless you play the campaign in REAL TIME then you basically can't do this. I know a few people here are playing in real time but of the thousands of players, I seriously doubt more than 20 have ever or will ever complete 1 full mission in real time. If the development team wishes to add a feature, how about wolfpacks. Those would be easier to add, more practical and would effect all players rather than less than 20.

Frederf221
05-08-2005, 01:21 PM
Well first off, the game does have correct stars. I'm not sure if it shows planets like Venus, or if the Moon is correct (But if they got the stars right, I would guess Luna is correct too).

The game lets you play all the other stations, why not nav too? You wouldn't have to play at 1x in order to do realistic nav! What are you thinking?

What a nav officer would do is try to guess your posisition reletive to known point A based on
1. Which direction you went
2. How fas you were going
3. How long it took

Now you're at B, knowing pretty much where you are. You wouldn't know your exactly location because in errors of direction, speed, time.

You keep doing this, every turn doing a new calculation, up to say J. At J you're in sight of land or some other recognizable feature. Or you've taken a sextant reading. Something that says "AH ha! Now I know my position more exactly" The uncertainty in position is minimized and when you lose sight of land it would go up again.

Sextant readings would keep the uncertainty down to a medium level (I can't imagine they give your position that accurately)

If you were out to sea for weeks, this error would be large and you'd come back and be 50km off.

This wouldn't have to be fully manual. If you wanted it just about as automated as what the game is currently the only difference would be the sub on the map would be your "guessed" location, and there'd be a dotted circle around your sub icon representing "We're in this circle somewhere."

durex2000
05-08-2005, 02:42 PM
Ok, i agree. but that would have to involve also changes to the weather system. i had periods where I could not see the sky due to cloudy weather for several days (no position determination possible). And what about the current (which also does not seem to be modelled in the game)? And in order to be realistic one would also need far more landmarks (very important for coastal navigation). I think there are much more important things to do.
durex

silent_kill_U4
05-08-2005, 04:35 PM
What if you removed, just the U-boat marker on the map? leaving the waypoint option. That way, if there ever was(and thay will be) a need to know you location all you would have to do is input a waypoint the line would still start at you present location!

Just a thought!

KenchiSulla1980
05-09-2005, 03:10 AM
lol don't ask for sextant stuff, It's pretty hard to do.

Dead reckoning and then ordering your nav officer to fix your position would be fun though, without the actual option to calculate it yourself (which would be nearly impossible for a non-experienced guy anyway, not even mentioning the tables you'll need, the perfect weather and the modelling of the sun (starts are just way to much) etc etc

One thing I really miss is a map of the harbour... how the hell could they have missed that?????

Navigating is fun!

KarlSteiner
05-09-2005, 03:46 AM
Oh,
it must not be very real Moon Sun and stars ythe moment in ths version.
Because it is not a real globe like MS FS9.

It would be enougth if they cut the permanent location and will bring a possibility to know the position only under good weather (sun moon) under a clear sky.

Mylo42
05-09-2005, 10:06 PM
I am one of the guys that would like to be able to turn off my GPS sub. To me, navigation and naval SIM go hand in hand. We really do not get to experience that aspect of being at sea.

I certainly don't think we can expect to have a SIM in which we naviagate by the stars / moon / sun / planets / tides / currents, and a million other factors

BUT...

as was mentioned, why not just have a sub with a dotted circle around it indicating "we are somewhere in here...according to my calculations." This info would be obtained from the navigator. That approximation could get more accurate (smaller circle around sub) the more experience the navigator has or based on the weather conditions. We would expect that "ring around the sub" to be bigger if we've been in a blinding storm for a week, blown God knows, how far. Suddenly, this guy is REALLY becoming important. Conversely, if its nice out and can see land (dead reconing), the nav's estimation (circle) would be better. If we think we can do a better job at figuring out exactly where we are, we are more than welcome to head to the nav map. With that must come the ability to label marks on the nav map. That way, when you actually do have a good idea where you are and when, you could label that on the map and continue on your way.

The point is, I think we are missing out on an important aspect of U-boat warfare by having our location displayed completely accurate, in "real time". It's just simply to GPS"ish" for me. I don't think the "circle around the sub" thing would be that difficult to implement.

Frederf221
05-10-2005, 02:18 AM
Thanks Mylo42, I try to see things realistically from a programming and learning curve perspective.

P.S. Patch 1.3 will add harbor maps to the nav and attack maps.

Mylo42
05-10-2005, 03:53 PM
Yes, I have heard about the harbour maps but, does it really matter if there are no ships to go hunting in those harbours ?

I parked myself in Firth of Forth for a month....nothing. (I snuck in there on a windy/rainy night and would surface only long enough at night to ventilate the sub. I thought I was being sneaky.) Maybe the harbour is shut down, all hands on strike or something. I really thought I would see stuff coming and going. Now I know what all the complaining is about.

...a little off topic but... See, now in that same scenario with a more realistic nav model (I like the circle thing...simple..sweet), it would have been rewarding just to make it to Firth of Forth in a blinding storm....now we're talking.

Frederf221
05-10-2005, 05:10 PM
The maps are to aid you navigating out and in of your friendly port.

HeibgesU999
05-10-2005, 11:26 PM
They could add Navigation as a qualification.

Xerx790
05-11-2005, 06:29 AM
Could they not use Radio Triangulation to set on exact spot once in a while?

PJCham
05-11-2005, 02:21 PM
In navigation:

* A circle is used to indicate a D.R. (dead reckoning plot). In SH3, it would be the icon used to track the U-boat's "best guess" position and its accuracy would degrade over time ... until a "fix" is taken by the navigator.

* A triangle is used to indicate a fix ... it represents three LOPs (lines of position) taken 60 degrees apart. The accuracy of a fix, at sea (away from landmarks), is dependant on weather conditions ... a clear night and calm seas allows the navigator to sight three celestial objects, approximating the desired 60-degree separation, with little error. In SH3, an accurate fix would depend on weather and the navigator's expertise.

In SH3:

The triangular icon should only appear at those points on the chart where a fix was actually taken. The "running" icon would be the D.R. circle, indicating the navigator's best guess of the boat's current position, and would move with the passage of time (compressed or otherwise). Its accuracy should degrade until the navigator takes another fix ... and should be no more accurate than the fix itself.

Spy17
05-11-2005, 02:34 PM
I also would love to see real navigation!
- it adds tension because there is a risk that you do not really know where you are.
- it is nice to "learn" some new skills while playing computer games.
-it would give the experience of the nav officer more importance (if you let him calculate)

archer49d
05-11-2005, 03:10 PM
I have a better idea...

If we could have a "lightened" circle around our U-Boats position thats an "uncertainty zone" as to our true position, the more effective your nav/watch crew is the smaller it is. We would always know we're somehwere in that zone, just like in the real world a good navigator can say he's within a ceratain area just based on the course/speed of the boat. In storms this "area" would get progressivley bigger with the length of the storm or until you can get a clear sky to take a sky (sextant) reading. It takes the insanity of trying to have the player solve for position out of the game and also adds the uncertainty of real life.

I just realized the posted above me had the same idea.

archer49d
05-11-2005, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Spy17:
I also would love to see real navigation!
- it adds tension because there is a risk that you do not really know where you are.
- it is nice to "learn" some new skills while playing computer games.
-it would give the experience of the nav officer more importance (if you let him calculate)

I just realized the poster above me had a similar idea.

nstutt
05-11-2005, 04:11 PM
Anything that adds to the immersion and challenge of the game without it being a bore would be great IMO and navigation officer readings including drift and currents effects would add loads to this game.

Deamon-
05-11-2005, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by irimi:
... And it would be far more realistic to have a real Mercator map

What is that and how does it looks like ?

Deamon

Kuikueg
05-12-2005, 05:02 AM
If you want to play the navigator, which I would really love to (done that in real life many times and no GPS!) you would need:

a) Accurate modelling of the sky, including the aspect changing with latitude.

b) Azimuth, rise and set tables for at least the main things (sun, moon, and a few stars) This only amounts to a big book.

c) Lighthouses with proper and distinct flashing patterns, tabulated and identified. Another book.

d) A sextant, not so hard to be simulated since its principles are already there in the periscope.

e) The ability to write time and tags in the markings (in the chart) as well as to make notes on it.

d) A proper Mercator chart.

f) A lot of knowledge (at least for most)

As lovely as it would be, it's not going to happen. Maybe with SH23.


Queequeg.

Corto
05-12-2005, 08:18 AM
Are you kidding me with all these "real navigation" stuff, people? I was a navigator by proffesion and I still am by hobby. I spent 3 years at merchant marine academy / 4 teaching hours daily only for navigation lessons. I traveled around the globe many times and I saw (sometimes I didn't saw them, which is worse) currents / streams / tides / waves / lights / ports etc. of so many variations I can even try to count them. Always had for use a small library of celestial tables, logarithmic calculations, tide tables, sometimes separated for EVERY minute of each individual day of the year... not to mention magnetic variations of Earth.
And you suggest you want them incorporated in a pc game?
Need to say more?

Edit: After extensive use of GPS, I thought once to try to "bring down the stars" one night, just for not to forget the art. It took me half hour to have a fix plotted... and d*mn me, I was good . Imagine not to be so stuck with tranditional methods.

W.Irving
05-12-2005, 08:59 AM
Look - in this game you get to be the captain of a U-boat. Not the navigator, not the medic, not the chief engineer, not the cook, not the ship itself - the captain.
He should not have to worry about such complicated matters such as which screw goes where when assembling a torpedo after maintenance, or how to use a sextant, or the state of the port engine fuel filter. He delegates orders; he orders the torpedo crew to get that verdammte torpedo in shape, he orders the navigator to get his arÔ┬*se up in the tower for an exact location, and he orders the machinist to get the engine running.

Right now, the only thing I use the navigator for is to query him for the weather (which, I admit, he's great at - even when we're submerged!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif), the depth (although I could as well use the depth finder myself), and the range until we're out of diesel.

I am all for approximated positions on the navigation map, based on the skill of my navigator, the time since the last fix was acquired, and so on..
But let us leave the navigation up to the navigator, and stick to the commanding of the boat. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Oh, and do we know for certain there are no currents in the game? I could've sworn I've drifted at 1kts for quite a long while in the med.

Corto
05-12-2005, 09:07 AM
If there are currents... they are not "charted"... which rise difficulty to 110%... and we are not aware of it... and we must blame.......
UBI

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

S VIIC_41
05-12-2005, 02:04 PM
Look - in this game you get to be the captain of a U-boat. Not the navigator, not the medic, not the chief engineer, not the cook, not the ship itself - the captain.
He should not have to worry about such complicated matters such as which screw goes where when assembling a torpedo after maintenance, or how to use a sextant, or the state of the port engine fuel filter. He delegates orders; he orders the torpedo crew to get that verdammte torpedo in shape, he orders the navigator to get his arÔ┬*se up in the tower for an exact location, and he orders the machinist to get the engine running.

But that doesn't give you a GPS in 1939.

There should be an option like was suggested with sometimes a rough idea of where you are depending on the weather and whatnot and educated guesses from the navigator as to where you are. He could get an accurate bearing automatically whenever the real life navigators did or when you ask him to.

nstutt
05-12-2005, 02:59 PM
I dont want to be able to paly as a navigator. I want the sub to drift and go off course and have to order the navigator to take measurements to determine position, and still not know exactly where we are. This kind of realistic gameplay would add a lot to the game - much like the game B17 2 in which you have to regularly help out the navigator to improve his skills. I would love to see the same thing here as well. It worled brilliantly in B17. The only reason I dont play that game anymore is becuase it becomes meaningless after a while flying mission after mission with no purpose in the overall game. I can see SH3 going like that as well though. Somehow if youre playing a game you need some kind of purpose to spur you on. Playing for the sake of playing doesnt do it for me. Missions would help as would helping to affect the course of the naval war. But this would be very difficult to implement.

W.Irving
05-12-2005, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by S VIIC_41:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Look - in this game you get to be the captain of a U-boat. Not the navigator, not the medic, not the chief engineer, not the cook, not the ship itself - the captain.
He should not have to worry about such complicated matters such as which screw goes where when assembling a torpedo after maintenance, or how to use a sextant, or the state of the port engine fuel filter. He delegates orders; he orders the torpedo crew to get that verdammte torpedo in shape, he orders the navigator to get his arÔ┬*se up in the tower for an exact location, and he orders the machinist to get the engine running.

But that doesn't give you a GPS in 1939.

There should be an option like was suggested with sometimes a rough idea of where you are depending on the weather and whatnot and educated guesses from the navigator as to where you are. He could get an accurate bearing automatically whenever the real life navigators did or when you ask him to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you'd read my post, you'd know this is exactly what I want. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Jose.MaC
05-12-2005, 04:08 PM
Since nor currents nor winds (able to move our boat) are not modeled ongame, speeds are modeled with an acuracy of 0.1 knot (maybe 0.01 knot), bearing is given always in degrees, and the world is esentially flat, there is no chance to get a noticiable wrong position by dead reckon even after some weeks in the sea. So is correctly simulated.

If in SHn they program a round world with currents and winds that can affect our ship, with a speed that you cannot set with full precision, with magnetic declination and with atmospherical refraction, you will have an inacurate position.