Jump to content

Leandros

Members
  • Posts

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Leandros's Achievements

Junior Member

Junior Member (1/3)

10

Reputation

  1. There is a patch for it on this site, I believe...
  2. Correct name of the mission was Jagdsaison - Hunting Season.
  3. Some testing on the AI…. Not to be too critical I have found one mission I find quite realistic in the PT game. That is Nachtjagd (Night Hunting) in the Channel section. This is about a six-boat flotilla (S-boats) obviously set in the period of fall 1940. I say this because, according to the description, the German naval leadership has just discovered that the S-boats can achieve successes against the Royal Navy and is therefore sending an enlarged unit over to the English coast to hunt for enemy coastal convoys. The S-boats were quite successful from the start and particularly after the fall of France when the French ports became available for bases. Alas, fall 1940. This mission takes place during night-time which is historically correct. The number of S-boats participating in such a mission usually numbered 4-6, operating as specifically organized flotillas. This is something the game should cater for. In the Silent Hunter game you are allocated to a flotilla and where this is based is your general operating area. If you ask me, Akella should have made much more out of this. The MTB environment, being as small as it was, they could have given you a choice of the actual commanders during the war. For example, if you picked a highly experienced captain, you’d be given higher odds or you had to qualify through a number of missions to get there. Right away I would say that the radar thing in the game is nonsense. It should at least be possible to shut it down (is it possible?). To my knowledge, no MTB’s had radars mounted until maybe in the last year of the war. They eventually got RWR’s – radar warning receivers. Destroyers, mostly destroyer leaders, started getting them in 1941. On the other hand, already during the fall of 1940 the German coastal artillery had full radar coverage of the Channel from the Thames Estuary to south of Portsmouth. As the German coastal artillery was under the navy there were good communication between this and their vessels operating in the Channel so these should have a good idea of where the enemy was. Back to the mission – we are playing the German side: The S-boat flotilla is on a northerly course in a wide line abreast. They are under the command of the leader. Then, in a few seconds pops up in front of us several enemy MTB’s in a wide arc heading directly towards our formation. How can this be? This could only be if they had radar or quite accidently was in that position, which is unlikely. I do nothing, just extends the range to the northerly waypoint to see if the AI does anything with my boats. No, as they are being attacked from several directions they are continuing straight ahead even if they give fire. Then a destroyer and a transport come into view but the flotilla continues straight ahead. A couple of the enemy MTB’s are destroyed, as are a couple of ours. No attempt is made of using torpedoes against destroyers or transports. When we have cut through the whole enemy convoy there is one S-boat left, no destroyers or transports damaged. No interference by the AI except an order to open fire. I play it one more time. The enemy MTB’s pop up in exactly the same location. This is really irksome and provides for very little variation in the game with consequent lack of long-time interest. I now disengage from the flotilla and withdraw. As the other boats are no longer under my command I’d expect some AI initiative from them. But, no – they continue on the same course, passing straight through the convoy, gradually dismembered. No use of torpedoes. Having passed through the convoy twice I know this is a large one with several transports and destroyers. The third time I take control of all the boats. After a couple of tests I find that the intelligent (!) way to do it is to withdraw in different directions, towing the enemy MTB’s along. While two 2-boat sections makes diversionary actions the third can go around and attack the transports and destroyers with torpedoes as they approach. Since you see your own units all the time it is a little too easy to control them, one has to assume that radio is used. The realism problem is that you also see the enemy units which are close to your far-away partner. Well, it is a game. After a few trials, using more time and stealth each time, I am able to sink all the transports without own losses. If there had been more variation in the opponents’ behavior I might have had three times more fun. A proposal for future scenarios/missions: The Norwegian navy had a MTB base on Shetland under British auspices. During the dark season they regularly crossed over to the Norwegian coast and hunted the German convoys going up and down the sheltered lane. They often hid along islands under camouflage nets through the day with an observer on a ridge communicating with the boat by a field telephone. There was many a duel fought with the German convoy escorts. Finally, it should be possible to speed up the game much more.
  4. Hi, guys – having played the game a few days I find it quite promising. If there had been a PT community like the Silent Hunter gang, with its clever developers, I would have been enthusiastic. But, alas, there isn’t one so I fear it won’t get much farther than the current version. The lack of activity here surely indicates this. For the serious military-history gamer I see some major problems, as well as for the more leisure action player. I waited eagerly for this game as it was to come with two specifics which I miss in the Silent Hunter III - torpedo-launching MTB’s and aircrafts, which the PT has. That is nice. My purpose is to make video scenarios to underline many of my arguments in a book that is to be released in the new year: http://daleypublishing.com/sealion.htm For my own part, and so far, I react negatively to 3 major items in the PT game: 1. Historical correctness. 2. Game-play layout 3. Lack of space…. The game does not take into consideration many of the variations on the different vessels as the war developed. The British MTB’s in 1940 had a top speed of approx. 25 knots as their third engines hadn’t been installed. At that time their armament consisted mainly of the .30 caliber Lewis machine guns, nothing like the .50 caliber Browning or 20 mm Oerlikon. The RN’s MGB’s – Motor Gun Boats - did not come into service until 1941. The German minesweeper that we see in many scenarios is the coal-driven Type 40/41 which did not come into use until 1941/1942. The prevailing German minesweeper (and escort vessel) was the Type 35. Their speed and armament was the same. The early S-boote did neither have the rounded command bridges nor the heavy armament seen in the game. Very few, if any, merchant vessels had quad 20 mm. machine cannons for air defense. These were limited to the fighting ships. The S-boote and R-boote are very well portrayed in the game as opposed to those in Silent Hunter III. I have tried a couple of attacks on submarine with depth-charges. They work every time. That is not very realistic. There are many daylight scenarios in the game. This is not realistic. Especially in the Channel area the majority of all the MTB actions took place in the dark. As a matter of fact, all RN vessels had standing orders to be back under their own air defense screen before daybreak. This applied till after the Normandy invasion in 1944. The same practice was implemented by the Germans. The reason for this was the increasing air power yielded by all parties. Sea movement is rather crude in comparison to the SH. In that game many such improvements have been made by the game modders. There are some blatant oversights in the mission texts. One mission is said to start in the Barents Sea but the action is happening in the Baltic. I find the game build-up somewhat childish and the whole archaic game idea is so artificial. The SH concept is much better in that you follow a timeline where you can choose which area of the world within your cruising range you want to operate in or follow strictly the chart references given by the commander of the U-boat force.. Or play individual scenarios of your choice. To follow this line the game speed would have to be possible to increase much more. What is almost worst is the plain dull chart area usually offered. That takes so much away from the feeling of being in a situation. In one scenario the length of the convoy takes up half the map area. Surely, most often you won’t see land in a real scenario but the MTB’s were, by definition, short-range vessels and much happened close to the shores. A realistic map gives a different kind of reference, also historically. In the bonus missions there are a couple of good examples on this. The Southern Gambit seems to make the game generally more interesting, if not for me. I haven’t bought that part yet since the Channel area is what I want to explore. However, the main plus factor should be the newly released mission editor. I haven’t tried that yet but it looks much like the SH ME. So far I have only leafed through the instructions. Not simple, but neither are other ME’s I have seen. Alas, my greatest loss is the lack of the German invasion barges constructed during the Fall of 1940. Without those it is awkward to simulate the Sea Lion operation.
  5. Thank you, all - in the meantime the 1.4 patch was up and that solved it....
  6. New patch - 1.4 - is now available for download at Battlefront.com. It worked for me.........
  7. Most reviews of the PT game says all the action takes place on open sea with only a few islands present. Going north I found solid land - the approaches to the VarangerFjord were quite well made. With coastal batteries! There were even Finnish boats cooperating with the Germans.
  8. How do you use IE8 to download the files...?
  9. TOAW has a Cold War scenario.....what I would like to see is an Operation Sea Lion scenario where the three elements were properly integrated......RTS!
  10. I am really looking forward to get the ME up and go. Here is a little island in the Channel.....has anybody been there...? And a little test picture.
  11. Hi, Croy - which version of the PT do you have...?
  12. Hmmm.....that worked just beautifully! Thank you!
  13. I am also getting blank pages. Can this be because I have the German version (rondomedia) of the game?
  14. Thank you - looks rather complicated but I'll try. Another thing - downloaded the mission editor that comes with South Gambit today. Looks a little like the SH editor but no manual or text in the help section came along so haven't been able to get it up and go as of yet. I have the PT version sold by rondomedia (German company/language). On Battlefront.com it is stated that the ME can only be used with the English version sold by Battlefront themselves. Does this mean I have to buy this version too, to make the ME to work?
  15. I got so fed up by trying again and again and not getting past mission 4 of the Weserübung section (even if I, as far as I can see, have fullfilled the criterias) that I went into the script (.PY), using notepad. After some fumbling I found a way to add 2 destroyers (by copying other inputs) and two MTB's to the German side, totalling 7 destroyers and 4 MTB's. After all, the Brits are on the stage with 5 destroyers, 2 cruisers and 2 MTB's. I also found what I suspected, some of the German ships did not have autotorpedoescapemaneuvering while all the British ships had it. Going further, which I intend to, I wouldn't be suprised if most of the German ships are down-valued in their specs relative to other nations. This is something I have found in other games as well. For some strange reason it seems very important to somebody that the Germans do not win....:confused:... Well, the result of my small adjustments was stunning.....But, still I am not getting past this mission.
×
×
  • Create New...