Jump to content

Submarine Warfare


Devil 505

Recommended Posts

Someone had to say this. With the carrier module coming out and talks of being able to walk around the module, whats the likely hood of WW2 Naval asset modules, AKA U-Boat and Gato Class modules.

 

I know this is a long shot however the fidelity and direction DCS is going looks like it could be possible in the future for WW2 sub warfare. I for one would love a submarine module with the fidelity of our aircraft modules. Miss the days of Silent Hunter. A PT boat module would be fun too.

 

Probably going to get roasted making such a comment but thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like this?

 

WIP-U-boat-Type-VII-02.jpg

 

RN MTB/MGBs & Kriegsmarine E-boats might be good additions too, although I don't know how much work the E-boats were doing by later 1944 ( which I think is our time period ). E-boats were certainly a threat on D-Day. I kinda wish the map/time had been the Mediterranean though ( even if my house is supposedly on the Normandy map ), both sides were running convoys/submarine strikes/large naval units/coastal forces around there on top of amphibious assault & desert campaigns.

 

If combined arms were more fully developed then ships might be nice things to drive around, but it's a long way off ready for that I think.


Edited by Richard Dastardly

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To have a submarine modeled and intractable to the depth (hehe, punny) that aircraft are would require an graphical/map rewrite. If you go below the water on maps currently, it doesn't look like water. It's essentially just falling through the map, and you can only go down by 500ft iirc.

 

However I'd like it as an AI for WWII Assets, but atm I personally would like to see that attention given to ground vehicles and more WWII AI

Hardware: T-16000M Pack, Saitek 3 Throttle Quadrant, Homemade 32-function Leo Bodnar Button Box, MFG Crosswind Pedals Oculus Rift S

System Specs: MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS, GTX 1070 SC2, AMD RX3700, 32GB DDR4-3200, Samsung 860 EVO, Samsung 970 EVO 250GB

Modules: Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, FC3, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-5E, P-51D, Spitfire Mk LF Mk. IXc, Bf-109K-4, Fw-190A-8

Maps: Normandy, Nevada

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember on Mudspike AMA inverview, Wags talk about ED go to add torpedoes to ships and aircrafts.

 

Are there plans in place for a larger scope and vision for the World War 2 project?

 

Very much so. Normandy Summer 1944 was just a toe dip in the water. New maps, new units, and a new combat theater are all in work to expand and improve the DCS World War II experience. We are also developing a highly detailed damage model, long awaited torpedoes feature that will allow to use torpedoes by aircraft and navy units, improved sighting system, and improved aircraft AI to make the experience even better.

 

Not bad see ASW warfare and weapons and sonar modeling in a future.


Edited by Silver_Dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To have a submarine modeled and intractable to the depth (hehe, punny) that aircraft are would require an graphical/map rewrite. If you go below the water on maps currently, it doesn't look like water. It's essentially just falling through the map, and you can only go down by 500ft iirc.

 

However I'd like it as an AI for WWII Assets, but atm I personally would like to see that attention given to ground vehicles and more WWII AI

 

Generally water *is* the floor of a map if there's sea involved, it just makes sense ( although you'd be in trouble if your land went below sea level... ). We do need a couple of convoy escort warships for either side, I think - Axis convoys down the channel were not a thing I can remember ( more around the Baltic or close to it ) but we don't have to be that limited here. Allied convoys stayed out of the channel too, but obviously defending them from U-boat ( and E-boat, and Ju-88 ) attacks should be a thing we can do.

 

Texas was actually there at D-Day - if we get that I demand we get Warspite, though!

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS would need sonar simulation first, then I would absolutly love to have a full fidelity sub module, although I would prefer modern or Cold War subs over WW2 subs.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw a really good submarine documentary on Prime about the US and UK trailing Russians subs during the Cold War. Learned so much I did not know about all three sides. All subs, especially the Russians, were quite phenomenal for their time. Would love to see this warfare brought to DCS. A lot of naval aviation went into tailing subs from WW2 on, so plenty to do for aviators as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw a really good submarine documentary on Prime about the US and UK trailing Russians subs during the Cold War. Learned so much I did not know about all three sides. All subs, especially the Russians, were quite phenomenal for their time. Would love to see this warfare brought to DCS. A lot of naval aviation went into tailing subs from WW2 on, so plenty to do for aviators as well.

Exactly! A P-3 Orion would also be a great DCS module if subs and a sophisticated sonar simulation are implemented :thumbup:

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangerous Waters reborn :thumbup:

Yeah, that's still best thing otu there if you want a 3D simulation of modern naval warfare! It would be so awesome if DCS could replace it :)

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1. It's a combat simulator World. The potential is already there, Tanks were discussed some time back. It might happen in our lifetimes, but I think we know this will be slow. ED should try to support modders a bit more to get this type of thing accelerated by the community. For that we need the underwater part fleshed out, sonar, movement, textures, but it seems not a huge leap of faith.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tanks would also be awesome. It would be a dream come true if I could get rid of games like Dangerous Waters and Steel Beasts if DCS combines all this in a single game. For now I have to keep dreaming... :)

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago there was talk of M1 Abrams data and a module being considered. Conversation went dark and it was never brought up again. Last I heard was combined arms needed a major overhaul before something like this happens. Same with Naval vessels. I hope it happens soon. So much potential for WW2 onwards with the inception of ship and armor modules. Combined with the inbound dynamic campaign coming. DCS would rival all combat sims

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would need the will to rebuild Combined Arms - this is probably one area where throwing a few devs at something might well work given no-one seems to be owning it right now.

 

My dream would be to see an interface to an infantry squad simulator ( not least so we couldn't just carpet-bomb everything & call it CAS, but mostly so what we do actually has tangible value ) but there would be some rather huge problems with a properly realistic infantry squad sim...

 

Working with others who're building sub/ship sims might be an idea anyway - is anyone building a tank sim? the last one I can think of is nearly 20 years old now - to save duplicating effort in a very niche market.


Edited by Richard Dastardly

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that it is probably a niche market for tanks and ships, but I think the same could be said for combat flight sims. I have played them from the time the very first ones were released. F-19 stealth fighter, F-117, Flying Fortress, all the James and Microprose sims ect.... I can honestly say, when ED started down the road of the study/combat sim market, it grew on a lot of us and has now expanded to a very broad audience. Former/current military pilots and flight crews, civilian pilots, aviation enthusiasts, kids wanting to be all of the above, fathers and sons flying two seaters together ect..... I think what used to be niche has become more popular.

 

I believe the same would happen with realistic Naval and armor units. Digital Combat Simulator is just that, it encompasses everything. Being former military, police, and now government contractor, I can promise you there is an audience who will buy the above! I really hope to see naval assets continue to be fleshed our and turned into full blown modules. A lot of us enjoy the history and challenges of learning to successfully operate and employ our countries former military might! I know there are plenty on standby for future ships and armor modules.


Edited by robert.clark251
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The skillset ( and thus involvement ) for CFS is a little broader than commanding a tank, though - I seem to remember successful land / sea sims having a fair bit of strategic involvement, much beyond planning a flight ( and Combined Arms obviously set out along those lines ). Sub sims are about as close as we get to flying stealth strike aircraft, I'm not sure how much a sub sim would gain from being part of a combined sim family though - not least because of the huge amount of time you'd spend doing next to nothing if your environment isn't tailored for you.

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to respectfully disagree. Take the English Channel/Normandy map. WW2 naval combat and submarine engagement on naval units there would not necessarily be a boring environment. Given realistic settings to locate enemy ships, aka not the map, there could be a lot of possibilities for engagement but still large enough to roam the sea. Destroyers protecting convoys transporting assets for a dynamic campaign. U Boats hunting those convoys. Surveillance birds hunting and looking for subs. I see plenty of opportunities, especially with multiplayer. If the sub is modeled accurately, it could be very fun handling damaged components, working closely to run silent and attack convoys ect. I would not throw this out the window yet. A lot of potential, at least for WW2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to respectfully disagree. Take the English Channel/Normandy map. WW2 naval combat and submarine engagement on naval units there would not necessarily be a boring environment. Given realistic settings to locate enemy ships, aka not the map, there could be a lot of possibilities for engagement but still large enough to roam the sea. Destroyers protecting convoys transporting assets for a dynamic campaign. U Boats hunting those convoys. Surveillance birds hunting and looking for subs. I see plenty of opportunities, especially with multiplayer. If the sub is modeled accurately, it could be very fun handling damaged components, working closely to run silent and attack convoys ect. I would not throw this out the window yet. A lot of potential, at least for WW2.

 

The thing is the transit time in an aircraft is usually short enough that it's not a great part of your gameplay. In a ship, even a MTB or an E-boat ( or a destroyer, some of them aren't much slower ) the transit time to the combat area would be a huge percentage. Now let's talk about U-boats...

 

If you could jump into vehicles already in place, then yep - there's a number of issues about just hopping around then though, and also just hopping in & out of vehicles does tend to break immersion.

 

Cross-channel raids in fast coastal vessels, that'd be a fun game - a bit surprised there haven't been more games involving small raiding craft.

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A WWII submarine module DCS style.

 

A week in port loading provisions and torpedoes, 3 hour start sequence and no VOIP comm when submerged.

 

I think the server would reset before anyone got out of port.

 

 

And by the same token, you wait for USS Stennis to leave a 3 month refit in dock, the Hawkeye to get on station and your CAP to be in position? I do not understand the logic of this statement.

 

 

 

Folks need to drop the single sortie mindset. That includes Eagle Dynamics.

 

 

Join in Progress and Persistent Multiplayer Missions with enduring objectives are the way to play DCS:World. Single players can still drop in, plan their mission and execute it in timescale, but no one waits for anyone and the engine rumbles on in between. Anything else is severely limited to very tight timescales. There is a lot that already can be done, but ED need to provide me/us with a lot more API interfaces and functionality to the Resource management system, Client Spawning and engineering/repair before it's more than a series of workarounds.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And by the same token, you wait for USS Stennis to leave a 3 month refit in dock, the Hawkeye to get on station and your CAP to be in position? I do not understand the logic of this statement.

 

 

 

Folks need to drop the single sortie mindset. That includes Eagle Dynamics.

 

 

Join in Progress and Persistent Multiplayer Missions with enduring objectives are the way to play DCS:World. Single players can still drop in, plan their mission and execute it in timescale, but no one waits for anyone and the engine rumbles on in between. Anything else is severely limited to very tight timescales. There is a lot that already can be done, but ED need to provide me/us with a lot more API interfaces and functionality to the Resource management system, Client Spawning and engineering/repair before it's more than a series of workarounds.

 

It was a bit of humor.

 

I hot start in all my missions and think AAR is a silly waste of time.

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laughed when you said I think the server would reset before anyone got out of port. LOL!!! I still think ED could pull this off. Of course we are not going to be waiting on toilet paper to get stocked and all hands accounted for, so that being said, I am sure a 3rd party could make a beast of a sub module some day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...