Silent Hunter 1 questions

[AngusJS]

I'm thinking about picking up Silent Hunter 1, as my computer can't handle Silent Hunter 4, and am thus stuck with the Kriegsmarine.

How was the TDC? Was it automatic like in AOD, essentially letting you just select a target, point the bow at it and fire? Manually identifying and plotting targets and then inputting the data is my favorite aspect of SH3.

Did you have the freedom to go anywhere in the Pacific? Was the campaign dynamic?

Thanks

[nikimcbee]

If I remember correctly, the TDC was auto or manual, you could turn it on/off?

And regarding the maps, you were assinged a specific patrol area, you could sail anywhere on that map, but you couldn't leave the map. It automatically accounted for the fuel used to get to the patrol area.

[Sailor Steve]

I don't recall being able to do manual targetting in Silent Hunter 1. It could be that I just didn't bother, but I don't remember the option.

As for the campaign, it was a dynamic career in the same vein as AOD's was. You would have a side-scrolling cut-scene of your boat leaving the pier, just like AOD, except there was no band or people on the pier, just a tanker parked out in the bay. The sound was a lot better, with real speech files and all.

As Mcbee pointed out, you would see that cut-scene and then be teleported to your patrol zone, unless your home base was in the zone. After a few patrols you would be asked if you wanted to retire. You didn't have to, it was just an option.

Over all, the game was a lot of fun.

[Onkel Neal]

I agree with the preceeding assessments. The campaign was dynamic, or at least gave every appearance of being non-scripted.

The TDC did have manual functions. You did not have any way to manually determine the range or speed, but you could switch the TDC to manual and adjust the settings. And miss, mostly

[Stratos]

You guys talk about SH1, but can you make it work on XP? I have SH commanders edition with all the patrols disks, and will be cool to play it on my rig. Possible?

[Hitman]

Sorry to correct you guys, buth SH1's TDC was a fully working replica of the real thing. You could do all manual targeting you want, and also start the position keeper to check against peri observations and confirm the quality of the solution.

If you use a paper to plot the target and never go to the game map (Which sadly will show the truth always), you can go as real as it gets!

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Stratos

You guys talk about SH1, but can you make it work on XP? I have SH commanders edition with all the patrols disks, and will be cool to play it on my rig. Possible?

Yes it works flawlessly in dosbox.
You just have to do an install to the hard drive and modify a games file (I don't remeber if you have to edit it or simply cancel the file in question) so that the primitive copy protection scheme doesnt get in the way to playing the game.

[MarkShot]

SHCE is quite good and runs great under DOSBOX.

My two gripes compared to AOD are:

(1) The patrol maps are convenient, but they also mean that you cannot stay with convoy for days and days. The maps are just too small for that.

(2) There was a serious over abundance of enemy traffic.

It had a very easy to use mission editor and there is something like 600-1,000 custom missions available. Also, there quite a number of third party utils. You could set your boat and the patrol zone you wanted to go to etc...

With the maps, there was a lot of hunting in the shallows. Also, it introduced missions other than just hunt for shipping.

The ASW AI in my opinion is not as good as AOD, but still far exceeds the SH3/4 series.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by MarkShot

(1) The patrol maps are convenient, but they also mean that you cannot stay with convoy for days and days. The maps are just too small for that.

Also I had one experience in which I was chasing and killing a merchant with my deck gun. Suddenly my boat started turning around. I tried to turn back, but my boat kept turning on its own. Turns out I was at the edge of the patrol zone and it wouldn't let me leave.

The plus side: It's the last subsim I played in which the merchants would actually try to turn tail and run away from you. Outstanding!

Also, there quite a number of third party utils. You could set your boat and the patrol zone you wanted to go to etc...

Also one that corrected the S-boats. The stock game gives it the stern torpedo, which only four of them had, and they didn't see combat. Also a merchant tonnage scrambler (not quite a randomizer, but close), as well as one that lets you choose your boat, including the big V-boats.

I have them all, and can put them up if anybody needs them.

[MarkShot]

Another nice thing about the maps is that some of them are largely in the shallows. This requires a very different mind set. You need not be thinking of evading, but rather taking long range shots and being long gone before the party starts (like a sniper).

In games with large maps like AOD/SH3/SH4, you can also hunt in shallows. However, I find that when given a choice, I always hunt in deep water rather than reduce my odds of survival.

---

Two of the reasons I rate the SH1 AI not as challenging compared to the AOD AI are:

(1) You can knock out destroyers on attack runs at PD with a stern tube. This is virtually impossible in AOD. Destroyers are fast small maneuverable ships. They are not the ideal target for dumb weapons which require static solutions.

(2) With 5 escorts in AOD, it is very, very hard to disengage once they have all arrived on station. Your best window to break contact is while there is just with 2-3 close. In SH1, it is easier during a DC attack to draw all the attackers to one side and then slip away in the other direction. In AOD, they are more likely to maintain a circular distribution.

I also like how AOD gives you two critical resources to manage: battery and compressed air.

[Eugene]

[quote=Sailor Steve
I have them all, and can put them up if anybody needs them.[/quote]

Yes please!

There is life in this one, still.

[Sailor Steve]

@ Markshot: I completely agree about it being too easy to kill destroyers with a stern shot. I agree but I used to get a kick out of doing it anyway.

On the other hand I remember that SH1 destroyers were more uniformly tenacious in their attacks. I had more than one occasion in AOD in which an early-war destroyer would run right over me and not drop depth charges, but think I was further on and hunt for me there. I never had that happen in SH1. In SH3, believe it or not, I have had that happen from time to time.

Dislikes: the fact that in both AOD and SH1 you can see everthing on the map when you have the scope up. In that I like the mods for the newer games much better - nothing shows up on my SH3 map unless I tag it first. Of course that's still much better than in Silent Service, in which everything was on the map even if you were 300 feet down. I used to dogfight with destroyers, twisting and turning and firing torpedoes by-guess-and-by-golly from that depth, and hitting as often as not.:rotfl:

@ Eugene: I'll try to have those up tomorrow.

[Hitman]

My two gripes compared to AOD are:

(1) The patrol maps are convenient, but they also mean that you cannot stay with convoy for days and days. The maps are just too small for that.

That's true, but after reading Silent Victory and O'Kane's both clear the bridge and wahoo, I must say that US boats rarely tried to stay with a convoy. It was more of an "intercept and kill" way of attacking.

(2) There was a serious over abundance of enemy traffic.

Agree completely. However, if you stay away from the map except for plotting your course you only will see what your crew spots.

The root of the problem is that SH1 version 1.0 had only a 256x time compression hence small maps and pretty overcrowded were the way to provide reasonable gameplay. When later patches kicked the game to 2048x, overabundance of targets and small patrol areas became more evident.

Two of the reasons I rate the SH1 AI not as challenging compared to the AOD AI are:

(1) You can knock out destroyers on attack runs at PD with a stern tube. This is virtually impossible in AOD. Destroyers are fast small maneuverable ships. They are not the ideal target for dumb weapons which require static solutions.

That's correct in my opinion, though you also must remember that indeed japanese destroyers were far larger and less maneuverable than british counterparts. Japanese DDs were largely authentic fleet destroyers, and not merely sub-hunters. Many US skippers frequently mistaked japanese DDs for light cruisers because of their size.

Japan didn't really bother start building true convoy escorts until it was too late; either they sent larger fleet destroyers or small gunboats to escort their merchants until 1944. When many of the first ones were sunk, they started to build smaller and cheaper destroyer-escorts.

also like how AOD gives you two critical resources to manage: battery and compressed air.

Wasn't that also in SH1? I recall having seen both the Co2/oxygen and of course the battery gauge

[Eugene]

Thanks, Steve!

[Sailor Steve]

And here you go!
http://files.filefront.com/Hawks+Sil.../fileinfo.html