Initial Thoughts on Silent Hunter III

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

The last time I played a subsim was probably about 8 years ago and it was
Jane's 688(i). That was a modern day sim, but was very well done and had a
great combination between gameplay and simulation elements.

I just purchased Silent Hunter 3 (SH3) a few days ago, which is a German
WWII U-boat sim/game. So far I have gone through the training missions, and
for the most part, with a little diligence and patience, they can be
completed successfully. With exception of the final training where you must
destroy a certain amount of tonnage of cargo ships. The trick is they are
being patrolled by a couple attack boats. My gameplan was to attack the
destroyer first. After getting a good position and firing solution, I fired
two torpedoes. Well, they must have been paying attention because when the
torpedoes came within 500m of them, they boogied out of there.

Now this brings me to my first gripe. For one, could a WWII destroyer go
from 4knots to 20 knots in a matter of a few seconds? I don't think so. So
it makes attacking any attack ships near impossible unless you're only a few
hundred meters from them. And their uncanny ability to spot an incoming
torpedo I can understand to a point, but there doesn't seem to be any way to
destroy them. I had to surface and use my deck gun and get a few lucky
shots. This is NOT by any means a way to sink a destroyer.

That gripe aside, everything else seems pretty cool. There is the ability to
control man assignments throughout the sub with a simple point, click, and
drag interface showcasing the different areas of the ship and the crew
available. The surface ships look great, and seem to have lots of modeled
destructable points. Hitting cargo on the ships results in a spectacular
explosion. Nailing the deck with an HE round will cause structures to
topple. And ships sink slowly with occasional cursory explosions.

Targeting ships requires identifying nationality and type with the
recognition manual to create an appropriate firing solution. A simplified
option can be turned on so that the ship is automatically identified. Trust
me, it makes life so much easier.

Navigating throughout the sub can be done through keyboard shortcuts or by
clicking on hotspots on the graphical interface. Crew will look at and speak
to you too. AI crew can man deck guns or flak guns and you can designate
targets for them. Or you can man them yourself. It sounds like your men gain
experience and improve their accuracy over time, so perhaps it is a good
idea to let them to fire on targets from time to time.

Overall, it is a fun game and doesn't seem so difficult to be frustrating.
Time will tell, however, depending on the mission and how interesting and
diverse the campaign will be.

I've just been having fun using the external camera and watching my torpedos
track to their destination.

Ok, enough for now, but will try to give an update after I've delved deep
into a campaign for a while.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

>I just purchased Silent Hunter 3 (SH3) a few days ago, which is a German
>WWII U-boat sim/game.

That's too bad! I won't purchase it then. That's too bad.


-pw
remove astericks (*) from e-mail address
(use paulwilliamson at spamcop dot net)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"pw" <***paulwilliamson@***spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:d2qp31pn2q36r18ckcn6l0296i8hg2lgg7@4ax.com...
>
>>I just purchased Silent Hunter 3 (SH3) a few days ago, which is a German
>>WWII U-boat sim/game.
>
> That's too bad! I won't purchase it then. That's too bad.
>
>
> -pw

And what is that supposed to mean?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 22:22:16 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
<magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:


>> That's too bad! I won't purchase it then. That's too bad.
>>
>>
>> -pw
>
>And what is that supposed to mean?
>
I think he is talking about this.

"Now this brings me to my first gripe. For one, could a WWII destroyer
go from 4knots to 20 knots in a matter of a few seconds?"

Sounds very unrealistic to me too.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
<magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:

Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.

Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>


Cheers!


Remco
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>
> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> Remco

Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position view?

With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it with
a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is there,
they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you could do
battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo convoy alive
or destroying it. That would make for some interesting multiplayer gaming.
 

jp

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
523
0
18,980
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"HockeyTownUSA" <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:i9Wdnbs1aaZJHKDfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
> news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
> > <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
> >
> > Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
> >
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> >
> > Remco
>
> Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position
view?
>
> With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
with
> a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is there,
> they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you could do
> battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo convoy
alive
> or destroying it. That would make for some interesting multiplayer gaming.


Actually, there's a not to bad destroyer game out, from a few years back,
when SH 2 was released. Problem is, not many folks idea of fun, is to
patrol a destroyer grid back and forth, back and forth, back and
forth.............well, you get the picture <g.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

The destroyer versus Submarine thing was done with the Silent Hunter 2 and
Destroyer Command pair of games so the owners of the franchise are aware of
the idea. Not sure how well it worked though. Maybe they'll get the SH3
coders to knock out a DC2 to go up against the Uboats of SH3
Dave

"HockeyTownUSA" <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:i9Wdnbs1aaZJHKDfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
> news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>
>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>>
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>
>> Remco
>
> Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position
> view?
>
> With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
> with a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is
> there, they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you
> could do battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo
> convoy alive or destroying it. That would make for some interesting
> multiplayer gaming.
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:00:08 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
<magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:


>With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it with
>a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is there,
>they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you could do
>battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo convoy alive
>or destroying it. That would make for some interesting multiplayer gaming.
>
>

That was done with Novalogic's "Wolfpack" many moons ago but it wasn't
a very realistic game.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

It'd be great if someone came up with a unified environment engine.

Then game developers could make sure their particular game was compatible
with the environment engine and you could hook up all kinds of sims online.

You could have a sub sim linked to a battleship sim linked up to a flight
sim. Imagine having Falcon 4 linked into Operation Flashpoint - a human
controlled squad on the ground could call in human Viper pilots for CAS
missions; it would even be possible to have a resource management engine
linked in so that people that enjoy micro managing could run the factories
and supply lines. Link in a decent sub-sim and you'd practically have a
"Red Storm Rising" game ( the book - not the sub sim ;-) ).

Ah well - better get coding ;-)

--
Richard Moore
---------------------------------------
Aquila Cybernetic Ltd
http://www.e-aquila.com
---------------------------------------
"HockeyTownUSA" <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:i9Wdnbs1aaZJHKDfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
> news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>
>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>>
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>
>> Remco
>
> Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position
> view?
>
> With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
> with a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is
> there, they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you
> could do battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo
> convoy alive or destroying it. That would make for some interesting
> multiplayer gaming.
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

Connected wrote:


> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:

Its strange, a few of the regulars seem to have left us while we get these
two. Both sound way too familiar to me...


Mitch
--
Remove "nospam." to reply.
SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:09:30 GMT, Mitch_A <naman@pacbell.nospam.net>
wrote:


>Its strange, a few of the regulars seem to have left us while we get these
>two. Both sound way too familiar to me...
>
>
>Mitch

Why do you care?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:00:08 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
<magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
>news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>
>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>

>Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position view?

Sort of. It's like the external free cam, but then inside the sub....


Cheers!


Remco
 

Eds

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2004
26
0
18,530
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:00:08 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
<magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
>news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>
>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>>
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>
>> Remco
>
>Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position view?
>
>With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it with
>a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is there,
>they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you could do
>battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo convoy alive
>or destroying it. That would make for some interesting multiplayer gaming.
>
>
There was and old sub sim called, I believe, Wolf pack that had just
that except I don't believe it had Multi player.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

I always wanted that. One of the Jane's EA teams had started that, but not
before EA's license expired and they dropped the project altogether. Can you
imagine a sim with F-15, Longbow 2, F/A-18, 688(i), and throw in a tank sim
for a pretty full gamut of vehicle choices.

If I win enough money in the lottery, I promise I will spend my own dough
to do just that. What else would I have to spend the money on? (besides a
gaggle of hot blondes, a Porche 911 Carrera, Lear jet, Extra 300, and a
network of top end PC's, personal movie theater, and well, the list
continues...)


"Richard Moore" <richard@nospam.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1111332532.0f62d0dc08bd2d8ab918e70bb61bcf23@teranews...
> It'd be great if someone came up with a unified environment engine.
>
> Then game developers could make sure their particular game was compatible
> with the environment engine and you could hook up all kinds of sims
> online.
>
> You could have a sub sim linked to a battleship sim linked up to a flight
> sim. Imagine having Falcon 4 linked into Operation Flashpoint - a human
> controlled squad on the ground could call in human Viper pilots for CAS
> missions; it would even be possible to have a resource management engine
> linked in so that people that enjoy micro managing could run the factories
> and supply lines. Link in a decent sub-sim and you'd practically have a
> "Red Storm Rising" game ( the book - not the sub sim ;-) ).
>
> Ah well - better get coding ;-)
>
> --
> Richard Moore
> ---------------------------------------
> Aquila Cybernetic Ltd
> http://www.e-aquila.com
> ---------------------------------------
> "HockeyTownUSA" <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:i9Wdnbs1aaZJHKDfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
>> news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>>
>>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>>
>>> Remco
>>
>> Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position
>> view?
>>
>> With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
>> with a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is
>> there, they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you
>> could do battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo
>> convoy alive or destroying it. That would make for some interesting
>> multiplayer gaming.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On 2005-03-20, HockeyTownUSA <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
> The last time I played a subsim was probably about 8 years ago and it was
> Jane's 688(i). That was a modern day sim, but was very well done and had a
> great combination between gameplay and simulation elements.
>
I've got (somewhere in a cupboard) the original SH and I *really*
enjoyed it (probably a bit more recently than 8 years - low spec
hardware means I've not tried anything more recent) - mine had (IIRC)
the pacific expansion pack - or maybe it was a US sub-sim - and I was
able to sink Jap. shipping. Kept me amused for many hours.

I'm planning a new, fast computer (mainly for MSFS) but SHIII appeals.
You mention in your post that men can be assigned; if I don't assign
them are they going to go about there proper jobs and get the job done
or do I have to worry about who goes where and whether they have the
training?

What I mean is, for example, we're on the surface and a spotter plane
comes in for a close look, will they automatically man the AA (or can I
just issue a 'Man the AA') or do I have to look around at who's
available and send that person to do the job?

I liked the way that the crew just did their job in the original and I
could get on running the sub.

Thanks if you are able to answer.


Justin.

--
Justin C by the sea.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Justin C" <justin.0503@purestblue.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd3ruc0.h71.justin.0503@stigmata.purestblue.com...
> On 2005-03-20, HockeyTownUSA <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>> The last time I played a subsim was probably about 8 years ago and it was
>> Jane's 688(i). That was a modern day sim, but was very well done and had
>> a
>> great combination between gameplay and simulation elements.
>>
> I've got (somewhere in a cupboard) the original SH and I *really*
> enjoyed it (probably a bit more recently than 8 years - low spec
> hardware means I've not tried anything more recent) - mine had (IIRC)
> the pacific expansion pack - or maybe it was a US sub-sim - and I was
> able to sink Jap. shipping. Kept me amused for many hours.
>
> I'm planning a new, fast computer (mainly for MSFS) but SHIII appeals.
> You mention in your post that men can be assigned; if I don't assign
> them are they going to go about there proper jobs and get the job done
> or do I have to worry about who goes where and whether they have the
> training?
>
> What I mean is, for example, we're on the surface and a spotter plane
> comes in for a close look, will they automatically man the AA (or can I
> just issue a 'Man the AA') or do I have to look around at who's
> available and send that person to do the job?
>
> I liked the way that the crew just did their job in the original and I
> could get on running the sub.
>
> Thanks if you are able to answer.
>
>
> Justin.
>
> --
> Justin C by the sea.

Well, so far as I can tell, unless there's an "automatic" adjustment, you
have to manually adjust your men. There are "hot buttons" that will assign
men in certain configurations for surface attack, surface cruise, damage
repair, etc, but it doesn't handle it as well as I'd like. Your men will
also get stressed and be unuseful until you let them rest a while. It became
a major pain in the butt when I attacked a cargo ship with a torpedo, then
surfaced to finish it off with deck guns, and two warships closed in on me
fast. After taking a little damage, I submerged, but had to frantiacally
reassign men. And then I realized men that were ok, if you took away too
many people from their station, then they would get stressed. Then *I* was
stressed. So I just dove to 60m and sat quiet, accelerated time so my guys
could rest and the warships eventually went away. But then you have to worry
about carbon dioxide and battery power and just hope the ships get bored and
go away.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

Why do you care why he cares?

--

gcisko@hotmail.com


"Connected" <connected@somewhere.here> wrote in message
news:q2hr31dtvrbr61uuhop87ctfdaiqttamj5@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:09:30 GMT, Mitch_A <naman@pacbell.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Its strange, a few of the regulars seem to have left us while we get these
>>two. Both sound way too familiar to me...
>>
>>
>>Mitch
>
> Why do you care?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:11:00 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <gcisko@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Why do you care why he cares?

Who the hell are you?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Connected" <connected@somewhere.here> wrote in message
news:0pms3112qbef11pvrs7tiggc3hgk247qf9@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:11:00 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <gcisko@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Why do you care why he cares?
>
> Who the hell are you?

Well if that is all you got, then you are a tosser.

--

gcisko@hotmail.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

If it's the same sim I'm thinking of, I bought it for my father when it
first came out. It was multiplayer in the sense of two people using the
same computer to switch off between sub commander and destroyer commander.
Lots of jumping in and out of the seat, not all that much fun. Hard to do a
"real-time" game with "turn-based" multiplayer.

There was also a problem of re-arming and re-fueling with the milk-cow...
No matter how slowly I approached, I'd hit the damn thing before I got the
message I was close enough to take on supplies...

"EdS" <EdS@EdS.com> wrote in message
news:ft7s31t0fj6l0kbh6ga92o8suq4vonmvs0@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:00:08 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Remco Moedt" <nope@notreally.com> wrote in message
>>news:sgtq31d2lrrtjfcrqs9n690v56u7jimk7n@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 19:35:15 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, SH3 is cool. There are problems, but overall it's a good game.
>>>
>>> Tried Shift + F2 yet? <g>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>>
>>> Remco
>>
>>Thanks. Is the Shift-F2 just supposed to give me an alternate position
>>view?
>>
>>With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
>>with
>>a battleship, cruiser, or destroyer simulation. I mean the basis is there,
>>they would just have to add user controllable screens. Then you could do
>>battles of destroyers versus submarines trying to keep a cargo convoy
>>alive
>>or destroying it. That would make for some interesting multiplayer gaming.
>>
>>
> There was and old sub sim called, I believe, Wolf pack that had just
> that except I don't believe it had Multi player.
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:50:08 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <gcisko@hotmail.com>
wrote:


>Well if that is all you got, then you are a tosser.

And if that's all you've got you are a part time poster living on past
glories.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

In article <RZz%d.65275$755.31480@lakeread05>,
Jay Williams <Voodoo141@buggeroffspammercox.net> wrote:
>"EdS" <EdS@EdS.com> wrote in message
>news:ft7s31t0fj6l0kbh6ga92o8suq4vonmvs0@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:00:08 -0500, "HockeyTownUSA"
>> <magma@killspam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>> With games like SH3, it always makes me wonder why they can't couple it
>>> with [other ship simulators]
>> I believe, Wolf pack that had just that except I don't believe it
>> had Multi player.
> [it had hot-seat -type multiplayer]

I remember that too. Never played it much, MicroProse's Silent Service
II was more appealing for some reason. Me and brother used to play it
every now and then, controlling the sub together. There was no
multiplayer as such, not that i'd remember anyway.

Anyone ever tried the Electronic Arts' 688 Attack Sub multiplayer over
a serial modem line? Nice game, that. I'm not speaking of the Jane's
newer 688i.

..mace --- +ea+
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

On 21 Mar 2005 17:57:39 GMT, mace@pcuf.fi (Markku Ojala) wrote:


>Anyone ever tried the Electronic Arts' 688 Attack Sub multiplayer over
>a serial modem line?

I've played it on Sega Genesis but not PC.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim (More info?)

"Connected" <connected@somewhere.here> wrote in message
news:ertt31tpv9hnrgva05grhcv0tmlu1n63tq@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:50:08 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <gcisko@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Well if that is all you got, then you are a tosser.
>
> And if that's all you've got you are a part time poster living on past
> glories.

Better to have had glories, than be a tosser.

:)

NOS.

--

gcisko@hotmail.com