Destroyer Command Page 9

Back To Page 8

Conclusion

As I said before, I like DC. It’s a really good surface ship simulator and there is potential to make it an excellent surface ship simulator. The basics of ship movement and weapon employment are realistically simulated. Even with the ship handling limitations mentioned, the simulation is a good vehicle to learn about relative motion, formations and station keeping. In addition, it is a good vehicle to learn the relative strengths and weaknesses of a WW II destroyer in relation to other platforms and weapon systems.

This is not a game for those who want an instant “shoot ‘em up.” A historical scenario, if played at 1´ time scale, may well take over an hour to complete. Even in a randomly generated mission some 10-15 minutes may elapse between scenario start and initial sighting of the enemy. Many of the necessary actions, such as maneuvering to station, tactical deployment or conducting a torpedo attack, can take many minutes to accomplish. This is not to say the game is boring – far from it. As a destroyer squadron commodore you will have your hands full deciding how to maneuver your squadron, what targets are assigned to whom, when and if to attack or retreat, etc..

In my review I have listed many strengths and weaknesses. I have listed the more important ones below. All suggestions for improvement are given as constructive criticism.

Strengths

Here are the game’s strengths as I see them:

1. A Real Ship Simulator – For me, this is by far the greatest strength of the game.
2. Numerous Subordinate Watch Stations to Man – Manning these subordinate watch stations really gives an appreciation of the team effort required to be a “hot running” ship.
3. Excellent Environmental Visuals – I use the F3 Observation deck station about 45% of the time. One really gets a feeling of being at sea from this station.
4. Adequate Ship Visual Models – OK, they’re not cutting edge, but most of the time one is far enough away that they don’t need to be. They’re more than good enough for the most important purpose: class identification and target angle assessment.
5. Enormous Development Potential Already Built In – Literally hundreds of ships are simulated. It shouldn’t take too much effort to advance this game from “Destroyer Command” to “Surface Combatant Command.”
6. A User Friendly CIC Interface – I use the F2 station about 45% of the time. This is very much like standing watch as Tactical Action Officer (TAO). The other 10% of the time, for now, is split between the F8 Main battery director and F12 Torpedo Director.
7. Good Sound Effects – No complaints here.
8. Huge Theater of Operations – Just about every ocean area is available to sail around on.

Weaknesses

Listed below are some of the more noticeable drawbacks. The “Must Fix” drawbacks absolutely must, in my opinion, be fixed.

Must Fix

The following drawbacks absolutely must be fixed:

1. Coarse Speed Control – The player must be able to order a propeller shaft speed to the nearest whole RPM. As the game currently is, station keeping is impossible.
2. Lack of Individual Shaft Speed Control – The player must be able to choose between Maneuvering Combinations and Propeller Order Mode, and if he chooses the former, to control Port and Starboard shafts independently.
3. Coarse Heading Control – The player must be able to positively order a heading to be steered to the nearest whole degree.
4. Visibility Limited to Approximately 12,000 yards – The simulation definition of “clear” really needs to allow visibility to about 24,000 yards, and it needs a “Very Clear” condition (max visibility approximately 32,000 yards) and “Exceptionally Clear” condition (visibility limited by curvature of the Earth).
5. Near Worthless Custom Mission Builder – The mission builder is extremely disappointing and fails to utilize the enormous potential already built into the game.
6. Sighting Ghost Ships Through Land Masses – This is a completely unrealistic effect and it needs correcting.

Really Should Fix

The following are drawbacks that, if fixed, would greatly improve the game:

1. Observation Deck View Locked to a Single View Point – The player should be able to take advantage of better viewpoints normally available to him.
2. Crude Surface Search Radar PPI Display – As is, the surface search PPI is a toy, not a useful sensor. It needs fixing as described previously.
3. No PPI Display for Air Search Radar – Limiting the air search radar to an “A” scope display is unrealistic and it makes the air search radar worthless.
4. Stupid AI – The OOD qualifications for the AI ship drivers should be revoked! Whether it’s a loop the loop way to get to station or running aground in a simple harbor entrance, I really wish I could send my AI squadron ships the following signal: “Flag November!”, which roughly translates as “What the @&%#! are you doing?!” (In reality, God help the OOD who causes his ship to receive such a message…)
5. No Wind and Current Effects – These are real world effects the player should be required to contend with.
6. Ship Motion Response in Heavy Weather – The current heavy weather response is much less than that expected for a real destroyer.
7. Ship Motion Response to Rudder at High Speeds – This effect is not represented enough. It is a real world effect the player should be required to contend with.
8. No Indirect NGFS Capability – This is a major mission area that is not adequately simulated.
9. Bridge View Misalignment – This “bug”, as described earlier, can be very confusing and it needs correcting.

A Fix Would Be Nice

As stated, it would be nice to see these drawbacks corrected, but for now this is not essential:

1. Some Visuals Are Overdone – Tone down the funnel smoke and some of the damage effects.
2. Flat Wakes – These visuals are underdone and detract from the “at sea” experience.
   Bland Land Masses; Crude Bases; No Navigational Aids – Please help me get home!
3. Unrealistic Ship Motion Response While in Protected Harbors and While Aground – If the player really screws up and runs his shiny new destroyer aground, let him know it by fixing him on the reef or sandbar!
4. Generic Bridge Optics – I would think these would be easy upgrades, and they would add to the “immersion factor” for the game.
5. Unrecognizable Engine Room – Either make it a realistic and functional engine room station, or delete it.
6. Fictitious Newport, RI, “Naval Base” – If I really tried to moor there, I would be on the rocks at Easton Bay. See DMA Chart 13221.
7. Landlubber Terminology Used in Manual – A destroyer is a ship, not a boat, and in WW II they burned black oil, not diesel fuel.

“I stand relieved.”

About the Author

Donald C. Simon served in the US Navy from 1981-1991. He is currently employed as a mechanical and propulsion systems engineer with Sperry Marine in Charlottesville, VA.

Watching DivTacs in the Med, 1986.
USS MISSOURI (BB 63) in the background.

Naval Experience

Nuclear Propulsion Training 1981-1982
Billet: Student
Major Qualifications: Nuclear Propulsion Subspecialty

USS SOUTH CAROLINA (CGN 37) 1982-1985
Billet: Machinery Division Officer
Major Qualifications: Engineering Officer of the Watch (EOOW); Engineer Officer

USS BAINBRIDGE (CGN 25) 1985-1987
Billet: Damage Control Assistant
Major Qualifications: Officer of the Deck (OOD) (underway); Surface Warfare Officer

Surface Warfare Officer School Command, Newport RI 1987-1989
Billet: Steam Engineering Instructor
Major Qualifications: Master Training Specialist

USS JOSEPH HEWES (FF 1078) 1989-1991
Billet: Operations Officer
Major Qualifications: Tactical Action Officer, Sea Detail OOD

Related posts:

Destroyer Command Destroyer Command Page 2 Destroyer Command Page 3 Destroyer Command Page 4 Destroyer Command Page 5 Destroyer Command Page 6 Destroyer Command Page 7 Destroyer Command Page 8