Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'asw'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 23 results

  1. I'm sure many of you think... ArI always cherry pick games where he sunks Submarines but never shows when a Submarine sinks him. Well, in order to be fair and balanced, I'm sharing this moment from this past weekend which I'm very confident it is the FIRST time I've been sunk as a surface ship by a Submarine since they were officially released. I was sunk because I did everything wrong... all the stuff I've said you shouldn't do, I did... but first a bit of context: I was already very frustrated and tilted after having a couple of poor matches while testing Pommern. In this particular match I had been fairly useless, there had been no openings for me to move "into the fray", each time I tried to move aggressively I was quickly peppered with Hindy HE, visits from the CV or AP gifts from Yamato & BB co. My team had already "bent the knee" so the match was already a nother defeat in progress, I needed to do something decisive right then and there... but Lo! the Sub is just in front of me, and not any Sub but one in testing I don't have the slightest idea about since I haven't played and have no other info than some Devblog numbers from some months ago that I totally not remember. So, it was a "whatever" moment ... let's charge the Sub and let's see what it can do... So, learn from my mistakes: I needlessly blew my DCP on that first dodge, there was zero reason for it... the torps were already "dumb" and I was out of harms way. I honestly don't know why I used DCP, maybe a reflex, a brain fart... the damage was done I charge right into the Sub, in the open, with enemies all around ... this was as Yolo as it comes I don't have the slightest idea of what the Sub is doing... is he kiting me? is he turning?... I have no clue as I don't know critical info as the Sub's loadout, submerged speed and maneuverability, torp reload... I'm going blind, knowledge is power, I have zero knowledge... I'm doomed to fail Even then I had a good chance to avoid damage if I just hadn't blew my DCP moments before... The Sub delivers a Submerged shotgun attack, if my finger had been quick enough on the DCP I could had broken the ping and prevented the torps from surfacing into me... they would had gone harmlessly below me. Things that make you go Hmmm... The torps stop homing on you at a certain range... on the horizontal plane. On the vertical plane they always keep homing ... not like I didn't knew that before. P.D. Yeah, if you jumped into the video to see me die, you are listening some Salsa
  2. Another day, another Submarine bites the dust... today a double serving! As opener, Cossack doing some Skasual ASW zoning. Subs can't pass when Cossack blocks the way, friendly BBs are protected and attrition consumes the Sub while trying to force his way in. (Warning: Submarine misplay inside)... @Junpei_MT you'll be surprised at the amount of Subs that eat torps, it is like they never expect the Torpedo Inquisition. For the main event, newcomer Kidd test her mettle against CV and Submarine acting together. How would the Kidd fare without having Hydro? Btw, that Salmon was a unicum player from a top clan.
  3. "These nightmarish creatures can be felled, they can be beaten!" Narrator, Darkest Dungeon... On the never ending quest to bring balance to the Force, another Submarine met, another Submarine sunk. This opponent was actually worthy, he pestered me by launching well aimed torps, forcing me out of the Cap a couple times. Sunk a couple of my careless team mates and did a solid job through the match. But the time of reckoning came at last the moment he was left alone with little support and tried to push my NC (I did a tactical withdrawal to lure him forward, yes mind games are important in this game)... I felt confident and pushed the Sub even in the face of the Zeiten, not really scared of it anyway. The weird island shape played a trick on me and got grounded but the good ole homing torpedoes came in my help, used DCP to fix their position and safely stepped back. For the next torpedo salvo also used DCP even when it wasn't really necessary because the Sub wasted his full salvo and my DCP would be recharged just in time for the next one. The Sub decided to die with the boots on and surfaced to meet me, trying to get her aft tubes on me but there was no chance as I always remained a step ahead. So far this week score vs Subs: 6 kills; 4 assistances; 0 deaths Tip of the day: Knowledge is Power For the curious: 20221115_185832_PBSD517-Cossack_23_Shards.wowsreplay
  4. I wouldn't recommend go hunting Submarines in a CL, but under the right conditions is something that can be done following certain safety measures. I'm having a great time playing Gokase, I'm very surprised at how good she is... if the rest of the line is like this, I'll be up for a very enjoyable ride. (tho I doubt it, later ships like comparatively much more clumsier). Anyway, I've been finding Subs in every match, thing I don't regret as I have a lot of fun flapping the poor cans. Gokase has proved very apt for the job given her combo of Hydro, speed and good rudder shift. Having a nimble ship is very important when going Sub hunting. Here some examples of engagements against Submarines. It is T6 so different circumstances to T10, not every aspect can be extrapolated but the general principles remain. Before we begin, Rule #1: Never rush a Sub unless you have an advantageous situation. Meaning, often the best choice is to delay the engagement until the conditions are in your favor, if you know what you are doing, you can stall a Submarine and nullify it. Believe it or not, Submarines can have it very difficult to deliver damage on aware targets that deny them the chance of a shotgun attack. Match 1: I've had to deal with this Sub in front of me for the whole match, he actually did a decent job and ranked 4th in his team, by his stats he is a good player. The tactic here is to fisrt eliminate the Submarine support and then go for the kill. As you can see it is until the end of the match that I am able to close the distance. I've been using the islands for protection and to keep tabs on the Sub location (via spotted indicator), for my last approach I use island cover to try and get into Hydro range, which I manage succesfully. Once within Hydro range it is a procedural kill, notice I don't need to close the distance, my weapon of choice is guns and exhausting the Sub dive time. Match 2: I'm isolated contesting a cap against a DD and a Sub, I can't attack the Sub until the DD is eliminated. After sinking the DD I stall and use the island as cover waiting for my Hydro to recharge, once the Hydro is on, the Sub is revealed and promptly dies. Notice all the while I was perfectly safe from the Sub. Match 3: I'm screening ahead of my BB, I suspect the I-56 is nearby and given its horrible concealment and dive time, there's almost zero chance of a nasty surprise. Once the I-56 is spotted it becomes roadkill, I just ran him over dodging the torps without issue. I use DCP on the last ditch torp salvo just to be sure. Match 4: Unexpected Submarine encounter on my way to a yolo torp execution. I need to wait some time over the Submarine in order to wait for my hydro to recharge. The safest place is trying to stay on top of the Submarine, I also keep circling in order to throw off any attempt of the Sub to read my bearing with its hydro and difficult any ambush chance. I see my allied DD coming down the channel so I know that escape route is covered, I position in order to cover the other routes of escape. Once Hydro recharges, the Sub dies... Would have dies anyway because lack of dive time.
  5. Given the persistent statements of "how you can't counterplay Submarines in a DD" (special call out to @Musket22) I present this quick and trivial example, it is nothing fancy just the pedestrian day-to-day work of a DD contesting Caps and doing ASW duty as a side mission. As I have previously said, Submarines are counterplayed through Concealment management (the objective being spotting them). Recon: I probe the Cap in order to see what's there, I'm confident it is the Sub but I can't Yolo in, it is early match and there's a lot of nasty stuff roaming around, including CV and Radar Applying pressure: I realize the Sub is unsupported so I have a window to push it while also taking the Cap Spotting the Submarine: I push the Submarine until I get him in Hydro range, now the Submarine is revealed to my team but I'm still unspotted. The Sub is at periscope depth and can't spot me back (my detection range is equal to my Air concealment value, a bit over 2 km). Notice I don't fire my guns so I don't get spotted by the Sub's team. Breaking contact: Due to an untimely CV intervention, I get spotted. It is then that I finally shoot the Sub because why the heck not if I am already spotted by planes. As I no longer have the Concealment advantage, I need to break contact and pull out. I use some ninja smoke to disengage and make a little mistake on leaving the smoke a bit too soon but I was worried about Tallin's Radar coming too close. In the end I'm able to take the Cap and safely disengage after taking just a scratch in exchange for 5K HP from the Sub, that's 1/3 of the Submarine's health. That's a good trade.
  6. Como podem terem reparado ao terminar de construir o Encouraçado Tier 8 Pan-Americano Atlântico, o hidroavião de guerra antissubmarina (GAS ou ASW em inglês) é o Short S.25 Sunderland; uma aeronave que foi atribuída ao navio pela sua origem britânica e de forma automática ao jogo. O problema é que a Força Aérea Brasileiro ou a Marinha Brasileira nunca usaram esta aeronave e por esta razão venho propor através deste tópico a mudanças de avião para o Consolidated PBY-5 Catalina que já está disponível no jogo. Para agregar mais ainda a proposta e a nação Pan-Americana no jogo, sugiro fazer a separação do PBY-5 americano para uma versão brasileira (para o Atlântico e futuros navios brasileiros como o Rio de Janeiro) e uma versão argentina (para o Nueve de Julio e futuros navios argentinos). Vale lembrar que esta sugestão só se refere ao avião no modelo e textura dele, não estou sugerindo aumentar (buffs) ou piorar (nerfs) para os valores que fazem parte dele como: HP, quantidade de bombas, dano das bombas e etc. Para o Brasil: Para a Argentina: Obrigado a todos por lerem esta publicação. Estarei colocando as fontes a seguir. Catalina Brasileiro: https://historiadafab.rudnei.cunha.nom.br/2021/02/13/consolidated-pby-catalina/ http://www.catalinasnobrasil.com.br/site/historico/15-na-fab.html Catalina Argentino: https://www.amilarg.com.ar/consolidated-catalina.html https://www.histarmar.com.ar/Armada Argentina/AviacionNaval/HIDR-Catalina.htm
  7. I'm not sure if I hit a setting wrong, but I cannot get the air strike hit box to show up as normal. Does anyone have an idea for why this is occurring?
  8. I just had a bunch of Randoms matches with nearly all including both CV's and Subs. As a BB player they were completely AWFUL. The last 2 had 2 Subs, 3 DD's and a CV per side so it was absolutely a disheartening lesson in frustration including a Torp-Detonation... ugh. Everything spams Fire, CV's keep everything spotted, Cap-Support is a dream, DC is perpetually on Cooldown, AA is a joke and ASW just makes splashes. Brawling ships have no place in this Randoms meta so please make one where we can actually PLAY against other ships, not just kite, mitigate and hope. If one thinks "But no BB/CR players will play the normal Randoms", then case-in-point. I'm certain to get a "mixed" reaction as CV/Sub players have a vested interest in keeping the Big Pinatas in their games, otherwise they'd have to fight eachother.
  9. hammer_1

    ASW air strikes

    Anyone other than me astounded that the planes for ship ASW airstrikes (to depth charge submarines) do not have as much range as the subs torpedoes do? So a sub can sit outside of you airplanes WOWs imposed range and torp you, you see it but cannot respond with a frickin airplane? Is the tether too short on the planes string? How can WOWs justify that?
  10. WHY DOES THE ITALIAN DD "Leone", (A Premium DD) LACK any Depth Charges? Apparently WG dropped the ball yet again and failed to provide it's Premium DD's with means of defeating submarines. I am getting seriously dissatisfied with the lack of clear oversight routinely exhibited by WG in terms of how they do and develop stuff. The biases are clearly obvious, as is WG's contempt for it's customer base. Apparently they have a routine habit of breaking their promises, (Such as the famous "No Submarines" Pledge.) and also of continuously nerfng their premium ships. This is getting ridiculous. No wonder people are leaving the game.
  11. Given the lack of available info about ASW weapons generally and those which are forward firing particularly, I decided to test them out. Of the ships equipped with this kind of...'weapons" I have only the Friesland and the Nevsky. If you have the other ones, please feel free to add your findings .I used Islands as cross-reference Friesland/Groningen ~ 1.11 Nevsky 1.19~1.21 It is a bit interesting that while they are forward firing, the one on the DD it appears to not be centered Has a bit of left/right deviation meaning that the salvos don't land in the same spot.
  12. Seems Wargaming has forgotten the Poor destroyer Leone again, though its no surprise as her development hell time is a sign to show, and as if the ship didnt suffer enough with super slow long arcs on her shells, painfully long reload times on her guns, only 4 torpedoes that are as useful as sea mines (though do reload quickly and have good range) The ship still completely lacks any means of attacking submerged submarines unlike all her Tier VI and even tier V destroyer counterparts! Thats right she cant even drop as little as the Duca D'Aosta with her 2 depth charges in her salvoes. the Leone has 0 means of engaging submarines aside from her guns. Can the Leone get anything? even just a 4km depth charge air strike? just something so she's not basically helpless against them would be appreciated, Cheers.
  13. With the current testing of subs on the main server, there is basically nothing else to talk about. And with all of these subs in random battles, a bit of a weird discrepancy has occurred where often, the best ASW ship isn’t a destroyer. For one, submarines can simply dive to max depth and be rendered invisible to destroyers. Two, a destroyer needs to be right on top of a sub in order to depth charge it, meaning it is out in a precarious spot. And three, the sub can spot the destroyer from beneath periscope depth the whole time its making its run, meaning that that destroyer will be noticed, and wont have stealth to save it. As a result of all of this, in many cases battleships are the best ASW units in the game right now. And that’s lame. So, I thought that I was having a original idea when I thought that a dedicated anti-sub destroyer line should be added. With American destroyer escorts being too slow, I gravitated towards escort destroyers, and looked to see if anyone made a line on this. LittleWhiteMouse did, back in 2019, which means that when I was thinking I had a clever plan, I was most likely really thinking of That thing that I read 2 years ago. And while her line is good, I thought that I could take a stab at it, and come up with one that fulfilled the ASW role and also managed to have its own unique playstyle. I believe that I have it. So before we get into the line, lets discuss what the line should feel like. The Feel of the Line. So, and this is going to be similar to what LWM had because this is just how these ships are, the escort destroyer line is going to consist of ships with fewer guns and torps than their counterparts, but with best in game ASW abilities and pretty darn good AA. The main things about the ships to give them flavor are as follows. The guns are all low caliber, maxing out at 120mm and bottoming out at 102mm. As mouse suggested, these guns will have 1/5 HE penetration for the smallest ones to be viable. They will have reduced fire chances, but will have increased damage in comparison to their British counterparts. This sort of gunnery performance comes straight from Haida. Add in very good reload rates, and they nearly make up the DPM gap amongst other destroyers. Starting at tier 6, all main guns are at the bow. These ships cannot shoot behind them, but when engaging another ship with gunfire can just point the bow in and start blasting. Torpedo armament will be low for their tiers up until tier IX. To compensate, they will have good range, decent damage and speed, and single launch abilities. Again, think Haida. Concealment is going to be suspiciously good for its tiers. Again, think Haida. Mobility is going to be very meh. The ships won’t be particularly fast. In general, 36 knots, which is the bottom end of destroyer speed. However, I think they should have pretty good turning circles. Slower, but more agile. AA is good… for a destroyer, make of that what you will. And as for consumables, again we rip off Haida, but with a few tweaks. They will have a short ranged hydroacoustic search that lasts for a long time, and (barring any changes to how subs are detected by hydro) will have the added bonus of working at a subs max depth. They will have crawling smoke. And finally, the question of speed boost. On the one hand, with subs going at something like 30 knots (depending on the sub) speed boost would be helpful in closing the distance and running them down. However that doesn’t really jive with the crawling smoke unless of course we just hand them the Italian exhaust smoke, to which I say hell no. a better fit would be defensive AA, used in smoke this creates a decent little AA escort. The final things to note about these ships will be the Hedgehogs and Squids. We’ll discuss these when we run into them in the tree. So, to the ships! Ships of the Line Tier 1: HMAS Condamine I'll be real, while the commonwealth was swimming in frigates, sloops, and corvettes, they aren't swimming in frigates, sloops, and corvettes that can both go 20 Knots and have more than 2 4 inch cannons. Really, this ship is it. And so, it wins tier 1 by default Tier II: HMAS Stalwart I don’t care about tier II. You probably don’t care about tier II. Chuck a ship in and move on. If you do care about tier II, and think this ship does not fit, let me know, and I will change it if it makes sense to. Tier III: HMAS ANZAC Honestly, this is a placeholder. There may be a ship that is better than ANZAC that needs to be put in here, but as of now I haven’t really researched for one. As of now, it’ll do. Tier IV: HMAS Vendetta Vendetta is a ship that I do care about, for one it has a very exciting early war history. And for II, it has a ASW refit. A hull will have 4 4” cannons, 2 triple torpedo launchers, and some depth charges. B hull half's the number of cannons, with one fore, and one aft. I can’t quite tell from the photos, but every indication is that the torpedoes are totally removed. In exchange, it gets increased AA (2 2 pounders, 3 20mm, and allegedy a bofors) and a Hedgehog launcher to supplement its depth charges. So, lets briefly discuss my ideas for hedgehogs in game. The Hedgehog can’t be aimed, when switching to it, the player gets a top down view showing the area where the Hedgehogs will land, and must steer the ship to where they want to fire. When they fire, the hedgehogs fly out and land about 2 KM from the ship (yes, that’s far, but considering the speeds and the compression, without this they aren’t much better than depth charges) and start their descent. They travel much faster than depth charges, but only explode if they make contact with the sub. I propose that they act as AP to the depth charges HE, and do more damage per hit than a depth charge (considering that they need to hit to activate). Right now, 2500 HP sounds about right but this can change. The main advantage of the hedgehog is that its just the appetizer. You can follow up with actual depth charges in short order. Tier V: HMCS Kootenay A hull is just Acasta, snooze. B removes the rearmost gun, piles on way more depth charges, removes one of the torpedo tubes, adds 7 20mm cannons (and maybe 2 of the unrotated projectile launchers a la hood?), and adds hedgehogs. Kootenay did sink some subs, so this fits well. Tier VI: HMCS Sioux Sioux marks the beginning of the all guns forward feel of the rest of the line, with a whopping 2 120mm cannons at the bow, and that’s it. With only one quad launcher for torps, she’s also feeling it here. However, AA is pretty good, with the main guns offering some help (not much really) and 6 40mm barrels, including one MKV twin mount and 4 single boffins mounts. The main selling point is the SQUID mortars that it sacrificed 2 guns for. Lets delve into these. They basically are the best of both worlds, combining the area affect of depth charges with the launch forward effect of the hedgehogs. With a range of 3 km, they present a view more akin to the spotter plane when activated (but maxing out at 3 KM, no looking over islands for you!) and show a reticule. The Squid should have a degree of train, I’d say 30 degrees side to side (animate the launchers rotating in their housing to show this art department!) allowing for more ease of use. When you fire, you launch all 3 in one shot. With a damage of 3000 per charge, and a much faster sink rate than the depth charges, the Squid Mortar should just be the most horrid thing for a sub to run into. Getting hit with 2 accurate bursts should send you to the locker. So, what follows this up? Tier VII: HMCS Micmac For tier VII, i'm promoting the full on DDE version of the Canadian Tribal. Basically Haida as she exists today. The 4 inch cannons will need that 1/5 penetration, but with this she should be able to dish out the damage. AA is increased thanks to the addition of the dual 3 inch cannon at the stern. Tier 8, HMAS Arunta. take what we have with HMCS Micmac, and just beef it up a little. beef up those 4 inch cannons to 120's, beef up the 76mm AA to a 4 inch cannon (as seen on Haida). And then Slight buffs to all the other stats. Tier 9, HMAS Tobruk: Again, same idea as on Arunta. just make everything... more The guns go to Darings 113mms (maybe rebalanced with better krupp on its AP) More torps (finally we get more than one launcher!) , more AA, plus other tier 9 buffs. Tier 10: Voyager... or something else. Historically, Voyager makes the most sense. it’s the next historical step after the Australian battle class. However... with a Daring already in the game, and Vampire II as well, I wonder if something different would fit better. And with the last few ships having a all guns forward design; I think that I would be OK with a Paper ship here. Imagine the absurdity of Druid, but with some Torp launchers at the cost of AA and a pair of limbo ASW mortars instead of one squid. I think that would be pretty interesting. Premium Ships HMCS Huron Huron is already baked into the cake, I am rooting for a ASW hunter refit for Huron at tier 7 or 8, with the 3 4-inch twin turrets, but I doubt it. HMCS Crusader HMCS Crusader could be an interesting tier 6, with small guns, a few torps, but a monstrous sonar or hydroacoustic consumable to reflect the towed arrays that she was experimenting with. And those are the ships! let me know what you guys think!
  14. 12345678790

    ASW data

    Hi all! Thought I'd compile a list of ships that currently carry ASW capabilities (depth charges and/or depth charge airstrike plane) along with some of their associated stats. Might be handy as a reference when subs are added to Ranked in 10.7. Ship-based depth charges data: Depth charge airstrike consumable (found on some BBs) data: Visualized: Do note that as this data was sourced from the PTS, it's liable to change. I'll try and update it again when 10.7 hits.
  15. For me the two most irritating things about submarines are a) how they are able to shift between the 6 m immunity zone with startling speed and b) how they are at times able to survive more than 20 depth charge hits. In reality any submarine that takes that many hits would more likely resemble a piece of metal Swiss cheese than a submarine. The purpose of these changes is to promote a more realistic and skill-based interaction between submarines and asw ships. Thus, I propose the following for ASW: Depth charges should not be a consumable, but instead a type of ammunition with varying reloads and load outs depending on class/nation. The reload should be reduced to something like 15 seconds (or 20 seconds at most), and load-outs can vary from 3x3, 9x1, or anything else (similar to different torpedo firing arrangements on torpedo-carrying surface ships). Depth charges should be able to be aimed. Whenever the depth charge consumable is selected, the captain of the asw ship should be able to select the depth that a single salvo (or perhaps for certain nations individual depth charges) can be dropped, perhaps in a top-down view (like a CV) or an underwater view (like a submarine but without showing said submarine unless detected by hydro or something). For example, a ship with a 3x3 load out can drop depth charges at 10 m, 50 m, and 30 m, while a ship with a 9x1 load out can drop charges at 10 m, 20 m, 30 m, 40 m, etc. The reticle can be something similar to a surface targeting reticle. Depth charge hit ribbons should only show up if either the submarine targeted is sunk or already detected. If a submarine is already detected or dies because of depth charge attacks, then the ribbons should appear on the asw ship's score sheet on the right-hand corner. However, if a submarine is not detected, then there is a different way of judging hits. Visual cues should aid with asw accuracy: historically a common trick of submarine captains is to eject oil/random parts to make it appear that a submarine is already sunk. Thus instead of ribbons, successful hits on a submarine should cause oil or parts to float up to the surface. These bits of debris should either be highlighted or easily noticeable whenever they surface so that in the heat of battle they may be used to judge the success of an asw attack (especially if an asw ship is looking for them), but also not highlighted so that it is possible for an asw ship that's inattentive to miss these signs. I also suggest the following for submarines: For the 6 m divide between vulnerable/immune to surface fire, implement a 10 second cool down every time submarine surfaces/dives across this line. This way, a prepared surface ship at a reasonably close range will be able to get off some hits (not all ships, but honestly if you're trying to do something like hit a submarine 5.9 m below with an Atlanta 11 m away, you're probably doing something wrong) Going deeper and slowing down in a submarine should increase depth charge dispersion and detection but not damage. In this way an asw ship that is only guessing your submarine's depth (given the above aim mechanic) would not inflict as much damage as an asw ship that has you pinned down and knows your location and depth, and gives the submarine captain time to get away with minimal damage should they be able to evade detection said asw attack. It also adds an interesting question for submarines: should they try and speed out of the depth charge zone at risk of being detected and pursued or hunker down and hope to slowly creep out of the firing line of the asw ship? Submarines should have an eject debris consumable. Corresponding to said visual cue for asw warfare above, submarines should be able to eject debris (oil, metal parts, etc.) with a 1 minute or so cool down between each use. This debris floats to the surface and is indistinguishable from actual debris caused by successful depth charge attacks. This allows submarines to perhaps fool an asw ship into ceasing or misjudging their attack or cause a smarter asw captain to realize that a submarine is not dead and continue their attack. This consumable can thus be a double-edged sword as it was in real life if used improperly.
  16. Herr_Reitz

    Carriers ASW Tips

    Hullo all, New to the whole sub thing. Somewhat familiar with carriers. I am finding, unless I catch a sub on the surface, my carriers have no offensive/defensive abilities for use against submarines. I must be missing something here, right? What tips do you have to sink 'em using your carrier, other than the possibility of ramming. TIA!
  17. Roamer0101

    ASW thoughts

    Played a few games today in DD's as I have been the one of the unlucky ones not to get a sub yet. I think ASW could be a great deal of fun and redefine how to do DD. I concentrated on staying alive and harassing from distance until the Subs started to go into the caps. Then I chased them down. One question I have is what is the distance that a Depth Charge will do damage? How far away can you start dropping? Is there an "Optimal" distance? I would like to hear from the Sub drivers so far on how effective the DC's are? It seemed like they did a lot of incidental hits and saw some fires and flooding. Is it something you fear?
  18. So WG has released some documentary stuff on IJN aircraft carrier submarines before and I have seen a few threads on giving the old odd tier CVs ASW capabilities, so I thought why not combine the two? When they inevitably add IJN subs, just give their scout plane the ability to drop depth charges. Everyone can clearly see that a single scout plane for a submarine would be either useless or simply give away a subs position in WOWS' current submarine game mode, but you know WG will try and shoe horn the historical gimmick anyway. With this, not only do they get their gimmick, but it also gives a class of submarines a more effective way of ASW than the current option which has been noted to be ... difficult. Surface players will have nothing to complain about other than the limited spotting capabilities of a single scout plane that should be easily shot down if it gets too close for any extended period of time. Submarines would have to be spotted for the ASW scout plane to be able to attack it anyway. The planes would be a consumable, meaning they would be very clearly limited in number and would have a cool down period between launches and duration. The only other conceivable consumable gimmick for IJN submarines would be manned torpedoes, which seems unlikely due to the decision to not include Kamikazes on IJN CVs as well as the redundancy of already having ping guided torpedoes.
  19. I don’t see what the big deal is. People on this forum in general are so angry. Other than lacking some historical accuracy, i think it’s a blast having another class in the game. Playing them, or playing against them has been no issue for me. What I do see is a lot of people not understanding the full mechanics regarding what they can and cannot do. Playing dds is very fun and now I have even more I can do. Subs being boring is a matter of personal opinion, because many have a lot of fun with them. I don’t think they should be locked to their own game mode permanently, but they should for now until final touches are in place. Im not saying that some things don’t need some changing or tweaking though. I’m saying the game isn’t “broken, busted, OP, useless, dying, etc”. All of these words pop up often every time something changes or is added to the game, or any other game out there. People hate change, and they don’t want to adapt. Personally, I think most people threatening to quit will not quit. Those that do are replaced by more new players that DO want subs. Probably more players than the one that quit too. I am not an OG alpha player. I migrated to Steam long ago, and my original account began when CV’s were more of an RTS style. I wasn’t upset through all of the changes then and I’m not going to start now because the meta is getting shaken up. I have spent a lot of money and supported this game because I have a lot of fun and appreciate the attention to detail, and I will continue doing so. If I was to give some constructive feedback though, it would go like this: 1. Although I have rarely had great opportunities to target BBs (too much other stuff to do in the match with higher priority while playing sub), I do think BBs need some self defense option. In those times that the end of the match results in a sub vs BB situation, the BB needs an ASW option such as a consumable. Perhaps an ASW plane that is NOT tied to current slot choices. All BBs would have one for the appropriate tier brackets. Heavy cruisers and other cruisers without depth charges should also have access to this consumable. 2. Hydroacoustic search should have a vertical detection along with lateral but not in its current form. We can use the classic German hydro of 5km as an example. It should be 5km lateral radius, with a 50m vertical detection that extends throughout its 5km radius. This way, the subs deep-dive consumable also has better use than its current form (51m-80m depth). 3. The sounds of the depth charges seem to have changed since PT. Please change it back. There’s no splashing, loud explosions, rumbles, etc anymore. They were perfect then. Now it’s too quiet. 4. The torpedo turn radius while acoustic homing is active is just a tad bit too tight. They should not turn quite that sharp. Subs should require a little more skill to be effective. 5. For the love of god, please add tracking to the sonar ping interface. It’s very disorienting, especially when underwater. Everyone else gets tracking to keep their crosshairs moving with the target, why shouldn’t the sub? 6. Subs need to be able to single fire torps. Not only for a bit of realism, but for strategy. 7. As far as camos, flags, and signals: In the current form, camos would be fine, but with T6 detectability as it is, they don’t need -10% detection. So, if you plan to have subs with this “baked-in” low detectability across all tiers, then introduce subtle camos with no detectability bonuses. Signals can look painted on the hull in the front, but very tiny. Flags too, but just a little bit bigger. 8. CVs need an ASW plane as well. This one is player controlled like the other planes in their squadrons. One plane at a time goes out with “the weapon”, controlled by player. The plane should have high hit points. This is really best used mid-late game to make sure the match isn’t drawn out, or the CV isn’t a sitting duck without defense options. If the plane is shot down, then tough break - fly another one out. The reason for this is so the submarine may also defend itself. The submarine should have a working AA mount (the one on the bridge). The model is there, so let’s use it. If the CV wants to focus a troublesome submarine, then that is less time the CV spends harassing other ships. I have some more ideas, but thought I would stop here to see how much love or hate I receive from the community before continuing. I’m interested in hearing thoughts on this.
  20. WanderingGhost

    CVE's and DE's - a concept

    So, the game has had CVE's in it before (Bogue) used as smaller CV's, and people have asked in the past about DE's being added. Obviously these types have a bit more reason now with subs on the way but of course the question is implementing them without being an overly focused type - it does no good to have an ASW ship on your team if it has 0 use against other types. It's a juggling act, not useless vs a BB but bit more ASW bend, but I think it's doable. I don't see many nations having these kinds of lines but not every nation had every type and all. For this I'm going to focus on USN ships simply because I have more info and ideas to use as examples. So I'll start with the CVE's. The idea for these is to make them low impact enough that mirror MM is unnecessary. While near impossible with fleet carriers, I do think that it can be achieved with relative ease on these. They have smaller air groups, fewer planes, and aren't carrying as many weapons meant to take out heavy ships. Unlike fleet CV's currently, they won't spot ships for the team in regards to ability to shoot, simply on the minimap like radar does for the first few seconds now. That should limit the information to not be as much an issue (as long range guns can't snipe a ship based on that info). The rest comes down to group size and damage really. As it stands much as I play CV's I think the alpha is too high on some ordnance (damage from volume vs per piece when a lot of this has volume AND per piece). So between lower alpha on weapons and smaller numbers the damage impact shouldn't be much more than a DD. At worst, maybe a cruiser. Here's a possible USN line: (planes in flight x number of flights) Tier 4 - USS Long Island 16 planes on deck, group of 4 F2A Buffalo's (2x2) and 4-6 SBC Helldivers (2x2 or 3x2). There are two ways to arm the F2A - my way (more historically accurate) with 2x 100 lb bombs dealing 1800-2100 damage or Wargaming's way with 4x 3.5" or 5" FFAR dealing roughly 600 or 8-900 damage respectively. The SBC's would have a single 500 lb bombs dealing 4200-4800 damage per plane. Tier 6 - Bogue 24-28 planes on deck. 1 group of 4 F4F-3/4 Wildcats (2x2) with 6x HVARS (1000 damage), 6 TBF Avengers (3x2 or 2x3) with 4x depth charges or 1x Mk 24 'mine' (probably 1500 damage +/-), 4 F4F-3/4 or TBF Avenger (2x2) with 2x 250 lb bombs (2400-3000 damage) or 4x 500 lb bombs (4200-4800 damage) Speed buffed to 21 knots Tier 8 - Casablanca 31-35 aircraft on deck. 1 group FM-2 Wildcats or TBM-1c Avengers with 6x (FM) or 8x (TBM) HVAR's with 6 planes (3x2 or 2x3), 6x TBM-1c with either 4x depth charges or 1x Mk 24 'mine' (3x2), 6x FM-2 or TBM-1c with 2x 250 lb bombs or 4x 500 lb bombs (3x2) Speed buffed to 25+ knots. Tier 10 - Commencement Bay 35+ aircraft on deck. 9x F4U-4B or TBM-3 with 8x HVAR (3x3), 6 or 9 TBM-3 with 4x depth charges or Mk 34 'mine' (2000+ damage) either 3x2 or 3x3, 4x F4U-4B (2x2) or 6x TBM-3 (3x2)with either 6-8x 250 lb bomb or 4x 500 lb bombs. Speed buffed to 25+ knots Before I start seeing 'that damage is way too low' there are a few things to remember. First of all is that these are meant to be sub hunters, while I have no idea the actual HP of subs as I wasn't chosen for testing, I'm guessing as much or less than same tier DD's. So a standard pen hit with a 3.5 inch FFAR that deals 600 max damage, is 200 per hit, and you fire 12 at tier 4. Odds are you won't hit all 12, but even half that is 1200 damage off a ship with ~10000 hp or less in one pass. These also shouldn't have the ridiculous nerf rockets were given a few patches ago instead of the alpha nerf they needed. More likely it'd be 5" FFAR's - closer to 300 damage per hit so 50% would be 1800 damage per pass. Bombs is a similar story - you have them in volume, a bit less so than rockets for the most part, not as accurate, but higher alpha. Depth charges again - I lack knowledge how they work as is - though they seem to need nerfs based on gameplay I watched, so no damage for them listed. And to explain for those unaware and do not instantly freak out when I say this - the Mk 24 and it's Mk 34 successor are the homing torpedoes that USN actually had operational during WWII and it's post war update respectively, and were meant mostly for ASW and surface ships really as a last resort/secondary target. Now as to why I say don't freak out because 'OMG CV WITH HOMING TORPS' - the fact they have some homing and historically had a hilariously small explosive charge for a torpedo is why the damage is that low as well as again, anti-sub weapon. However there are other drawbacks as well - generally the range should probably be fairly short for them, at best the torpedoes should be maybe a bit faster than a sub, meaning most surface ships should be able to out run them and for subs the option of out diving them at minimum (if not possibly in cases out running them, though most that'd likely be on the surface), and in general avoiding them (they aren't going to be super agile). That and DD's can easily out run them, and any cruiser or BB that can't likely has torpedo protection on top of HP to reduce damage and all. The worst would be any flooding it may cause. Also given the nature of aerial dropped depth charges usually meant for shallower attacks, depending on what they land near I see some use for them in attacking ships though likely not as great as against a submarine. I imagine against a DD they may do some actual damage where as a BB may just have steering/propulsion knocked out and maybe some flooding - unfortunately while there is talk of Taffy 3 attacking the center force with depth charges out of desperation, and ships having damaged themselves mistakenly with depth charges, can't seem to find much saying what kind of damage may have actually been done. The TBF/M's with depth charges and Mk 24/34's would have MAD systems - basically what they gave DD's in test 2 when they are surfaced or at shallower depths, but would only go off within about 4 km of the sub max. When using rockets/bombs need to spot it manually for the most part. I say the most part because I've given consideration to the tier 10 TBM's with rockets possibly having a unique consumable to make them a choice over the F4U - aside from being a sturdier plane - Sonobuoy's. I imagine them kinda like a place-able hydro that lasts for 30-60 seconds and shows subs and ships at x range, and subs that are not dove deep (second level below periscope depth). The question would be limited number or unlimited but longer CD. I also felt it better to give options so they aren't as boring to play as fleet CV's currently are and take advantage of the roles the planes can fill. Attack planes an option for more rockets and a sturdier plane at cost of speed and agility, or fewer rockets on a faster more agile plane with fewer hitpoints, or the same other than rockets but one has an edge hunting subs, the other an edge running down surface ships. The Depth charges were low hanging fruit for USN and while I don't think USN subs should have homing torps, save maybe at tier 10 or 9 depending on what a full tech tree would look like, I feel it'd be wrong to pass these up on ASW carriers. And it adds some utility for anti-ship options even if not super amazing. As far as bombers there are 2 distinct styles at play with these The TBF/M's would be glide bombers - between what UK currently is and standard USN, generally more covering an area with a heavier payload. The fighter-bomber option meanwhile is basically high speed DB's - with the F4U taking advantage of it's pretty insane carry capacity (though preferably only the 6x 250 lb bombs used as that still puts it lower payload than the the TMB) having a bit more area coverage than predecessors but still less powerful bombs than the TBM is carrying. Also of note - these would be far stealthier than the fleet CV's, what level of stealth I don't know exactly, but these would rely a bit more on that than straight up speed to run. Also, even though it's even's only - not having the same nonsense we have currently with CV's on how much xp these take to get to the next level. So going from 6-8 would take either the same as going from 6 to 7 OR 7 to 8, not the current one where it's the xp where it's the xp to get from 6 to 7 AND 7 to 8. This would hopefully help them fit the role of sub-hunting, making them unique from fleet carriers a bit, and give them tools effective against subs without being too insane, and still have some ability to attack ships on the surface and still do some damage other than DD's and if added DE's. And reigned in enough to not need mirrored MM. Destroyer Escorts. - Tier Class Armament Speed Notes 3 Evart 3x 76 mm/50 guns, 2 K guns, 2 DC rails, assorted AA 19 knots 4 Edsall* 3x 76 mm guns, 8 k guns, 2 DC rails, Hedgehog, assorted AA, 1x3 TT 21 knots 5 Cannon* 3x 76 mm guns, 8 k guns, 2 DC rails, Hedgehog, assorted AA, 1x3 TT 21 knots 6 Buckley* 3x 76 mm guns, 8 k guns, 2 DC rails, Hedgehog, assorted AA, 1x3 TT 24+ knots 7 Rudderow 2x1 127 mm/38 guns, 8 k guns, 2 DC rails, Hedgehog, assorted AA, 1x3 TT 24+ knots Main battery and AA pretty much deciding factor 8 John C. Butler 2x1 127 mm/38, 8 k guns, 2 DC racks, hedgehog, assorted AA, 1x3 TT 29 knots More AA than previous ships, rounded up the speed Samuel B Roberts achieved at Samar 9 Bristol (or Dealey) 4x1 127 mm/38 guns, 6 K guns, 2 DC racks, assorted AA, 1x5 TT 37.5 knots Sub hunting version of Gleaves class 10 Dealey (or Bristol) 2x2 76 mm Mk 33, 1x4 TT, 2 ASW torpedo launchers (seems like 1 per side, 3 torps per), 2x hedgehog or squid, 2 k guns 25 knots * The order is a bit messed up from reality, should go Buckley, Cannon, Edsall, but the HP they'd likely have, speed, AA and all kinda made it this makes more sense. With 9 and 10 I have what I'm calling the "Dealey Dilemma". I decided late in the game to pass on Claude Jones (ships after Dealey) when I stumbled across Bristol which some things refer to as a DE rather than DD, and either way the subclass was meant to be more ASW/AA. Obviously, being a Gleaves class, it's heavier, faster, has 4x 127 mm guns, a quintuple launcher, and well, small caliber AA on top of more K guns. So other than it wold mean inconsistent calibers jumping from 127 to 76 back to 127, something Wargaming seems to have an issue with these days, it seems like an obvious choice to be tier 10. But then there is the argument to be had over Dealey's tech. Dealey's 76 mm guns with a historical RoF is between 45-50 RPM - or a 1.2-1.3 second reload without BFT or AR - I'm not sure dakka can get any more maximumer. Which I think the insane rate of fire would likely make up for the lower alpha of a 76 mm instead of 127. Lacking a bit in k guns and DC but packing either 2 Hedgehog or squid systems likely makes up for that. Not to mention ASW torps that like the above CVE's may be slower and low damage, but still home in on a target. Though I'm thinking those are single launch with a bit of a delay (2, maybe 3 seconds). Some of these may need speed tweaks based on how fast subs can go, or general balance, but overall, speed doesn't seem like an issue. Staying historical 9 and 10 have 0 problems I think fighting other ships outside their class with their guns, and all but the lowest one has a torpedo tube that can be used to attack larger targets. The question mark is 3-8 vs other ships. The 3x 76 mm guns on the low tiers historically top out at 20 RPM or a 3 second reload, and the 2 with 2x 127 mm I believe are the type with hoists and so could achieve up to 22 RPM, or a 2.7 second reload. Both numbers are faster rates of fire than contemporaries (4 seconds and 3.3 respectively) in the USN line which has some of the highest fire rates, the question is is it enough? Though a slight fudging of RoF would not be the worst thing. The other thing would be HE pen. Even at 1/4 76 mm breaks out to 19 even, though the 127 mm guns would have 31 mm of pen. Generally maybe the line's pen should be set at 21 mm so it doesn't shatter on pretty much everything. Typical DD rtpe consumables and maybe slightly better stealth (most after all are a little smaller than DD's) - I do think it's possible to have a line with them that can actually function in the game, with a bit more purpose with subs added (which will likely happen before these). I imagine other possible tweaks for them to be slightly better sub-hunters, maybe faster depth charge reload, slightly longer range detection to track subs, whatever. Anyway, my hair brained idea using what I currently have on USN stuff for a CVE and DE line that would hopefully work well enough in game. While at the same time opening up some historical ships I think people would like to see (Samuel B Roberts, any of the 6 'jeep carriers' at the battle) as well as some maybe unique ones (USS Eldridge as a Halloween one based on the supposed 'Philadelphia Experiment' - perhaps in place of smoke it temporarily turns invisible, but can't fire any guns or torpedoes). It's all still in a more rough draft form, probably needs more work, but figure I'd toss it out there. This has been another wall by WanderingGhost to be ignored.
  21. So get this out of the way - these are second hand, their based off watching video's and observing gameplay there as I didn't get in to testing. A point or two I have however I don't think really require having to play them. It's also my opinion - people agree, great, people don't - oh well. Also - a lot of text is inevitable, you have been warned. Tech Trees - Starting off with something I don't think requires me to play them - the tech trees. Short version - I hate them. To clarify - I like the choices, at least most of them, but evens only from tier 6 with the type VII at tier 6 - just no. I don't think it should be seeing some of the ships it does, or at least less of them. And as I've said in the past months, the exclusion of First World War subs is just wrong. And if Germany and America only had these handful of classes - okay fine, but just like the CV's - they don't. For the 2 established lines we start with I have 2 line setups - one goes 5-10 with just adding a couple and some moving, the other which can be tweaked is 4-10 with tier 10 shifting away from really mid-later 40's to something more akin to the start of 'modern' submarines right before the Nuclear Era - though this can be tweaked to run the same with 5-10. Tier German Tech Tree German Premium Tier USN Tech Tree USN Premium 5 U-19 type 4 Tubes (2 bow/aft), 1x -> 2x 8.8 cm gun 5 S-Class 5 Tubes (4 bow, 1 aft), 102 mm gun 6 UB-III type (UB-48) 5 Tubes (4 bow, 1 aft), 1x 8.8 cm gun -> 2x 10.5 cm (Halloween) UB-65* 5 Tubes (4/1), 1x 8.8 cm gun 6 V-Class (Cachalot) 6 Tubes (4 bow, 2 aft), 76 mm gun, 3x. 50 MG's V-Class (Nautilus) 6 Tubes (4 bow, 2 aft), 2x 152 mm guns, AA guns 7 Type VIIC (U-69) 5 Tubes (4 bow, 1 aft), 1x 8.8 cm gun, AA guns Type IA 6 Tubes (4 bow, 2 aft), 1x 10.5 cm, 1x 2 cm AA gun 7 Salmon Class 8 Tubes (4 bow/aft), 76 mm gun -> 102 or 127 mm gun, AA guns 8 Type IXC/40 (U-190) 6 Tubes (4 bow, 2 aft), 1x 10.5 cm gun, AA guns 8 Tambor Class 10 Tubes (6 bow, 4 aft), 1x 127 mm gun, AA guns 9 Type XVIII (U-796)** 6 Tubes (bow), 2x2 30/73 AA guns Type XXVI (U-4501)** 10 Tubes (4 bow, 6 amidships aft) 9 Gato Class (or Balao)*** 10 Tubes (6 bow, 4 aft), 1x 102 or 127 mm -> 2x 127 mm, AA guns USS Chopper [Balao] or Barb [Gato]*** 10 Tubes (6 bow, 4 aft), 1-2x 127 mm guns, AA guns, 5 inch rocket launcher 10 Type XXI (U-2501) 6 Tubes (bow), 2x2 2 cm AA 10 Tench Class 10 Tubes (6 bow, 4 aft), 2x 127 mm guns, AA guns * UB-65: The submarine was supposedly haunted, and was generally plagued during construction and seemed almost cursed. Could make for a interesting choice for a Halloween premium. **Type XVIII and XXVI - Both of these use the same propulsion and are both high speed, admittedly higher than the XXI, but the hull design of XVIII was used for XXI and was a stepping stone between traditional ships like the Type IX and XXI. XXVI being equally, if not more, paper and of the same family at that point I feel is better at T9. While her armament seems impressive at 10 tubes, matching most anything American, the lay out is to say, unique - everything I find indicate they are angled out toward aft and would have to work similar to ships with tubes on the sides and limited movement. *** Gato/Balao and Chopper/Barb - This is one of those 'preference' things with me. Gato and Balao seem to get lumped together, if I have to choose one to add to the tech tree - I choose Gato since Balao is basically just a tweaked version then. Like how if I had my way, Gnei and Scharn would swap places but keep their armaments. That said while I find info saying Chopper at one point had rockets - Barb, which is a Gato, is confirmed 100% to have had and used them. In this case - the tech tree would determine the premium. The USN line is a tad weird to me, mostly because I kept Cachalot (if it didn't have the design influence on the following ships - I'd remove it) but I wasn't about to move them to tier 7. If we were to shift things to add the later more 'modern' type subs - The USN line would all shift down a tier with the tier 10 being Tang or Barracuda class, Germany would do the same (with a what if ship), though if we opt to keep T5 as the starting point, which is more than fair, but with the Tang/Barracuda and Sub X I'd say omit type XVIII and move Tambor to a second line, With the first line being S, V, Salmon, Gato, Tench, Tang and the other after S and V being Sargo, Tambo, Balao, Barracuda. I feel this is a bit better, adding some earlier subs and inter-war development and goes through progression of design and all a bit better. U-19 type (specifically U-21) scored the first ship kill with a self propelled torpedo, UB-III type had a fair influence on the type VII design, Type XVIII wasn't added till I started typing this - my intent had been to put the Type VII at tier 8 and the type IA at tier 7 - but figured the random increase then decrease of tubes may be an issue for Wargaming, players, or both because consistency. But hey, if Wargaming and players are good with it pass on Type XVIII, put VII at tier 8, IX at tier 9 and IA at tier 7. On the American side - well admittedly there seem to be issues in WWI subs, but it didn't seem right to omit Tambor (the first actual successful Fleet Submarines of the USN) and the Tench really being the peak of the design during the war before the post war Type XXI types. Though that said some of my other suggestions tie in to subs chosen as well (especially the post war subs) Torpedoes - This is the section where I expect most of the community will want to tar and feather me. The ping system - Here's my thing with this: if we want to add those more 1950's pre-nuclear subs that were based a lot of the Type XXI and operate more underwater than above and have this be a thing at tier 10 - okay, fine, I say lets do it and have it apply against subs as well. Otherwise - just remove it. It's not how torpedoes worked back then, even homing ones, and no it is not a 'skill check' as I've seen some WG staff refer to it as. Predicting where my target is going to be in 40-90 seconds should be more than enough. And the way it all works is kinda dumb in my opinion. Homing torpedoes in general - So this is where I know a lot of players will lay on the hate, least the ones that aren't Anti-Sub. I think that homing torpedoes should be left to tier 8 and higher German submarines. They should also have a lower damage than a normal, unguided torpedo. That said - the homing torpedoes like their real life counterpart should be more 'fire and forget' like the real ones, that if they are withing 400 meters or less of an enemy ship will start to track. Pro - if your aim was off a little bit, you may still get a hit, Con - may not hit the ship you want, as it aims for the stern may hit protection instead of an unprotected spot. Though things the Anti-Sub players may hate - they would no longer directly give your position away, and they would simply be an ammo choice like HE or AP - do you opt for lower damage with higher accuracy or the ones that'll really hurt a ship. Or - given how they track similar to the one type in Halloween last year - use the one type to try and disable the ship and the other to actually sink it. And for those that I know likely want a Type VII with G7es TIV/V homing torps - there are literally hundreds of them, some made later, that we could bump up a tier and give them the homing options. USN and pre-Tier 8 Germany: So with above where does that leave the previous German ships and USN line. Well, tier 5 I think should just be getting used to subs, and learning how to use their normal torps. If we for some insane reason do put subs at tier 4 - absolutely just point and shoot and need to have aimed right. Tier 6 and 7 for Germany and 6+ for USN - both sides used pattern running torpedoes, they can make for an excellent option. Albeit, we are talking about a torpedo that will run and either go back and forth like it's up a latter or ends running in a circle so... the question is trusting players to use it and NOT team kill by mistake. Alternatively - Germany gets a couple tiers of pattern run (as a precursor to homing) and USN's alternate is the deeper torpedo that citadels Cruisers and/or Battleships/CV's - though possibly limited only to the bow tubes for balance sake. Germany being a bit more accurate, USN going a bit more in terms of bigger boom and well spray and pray. I think players would also be a little less annoyed if the torpedo citadel they just ate was because someone actually aimed a torpedo and hit them there themselves, not pinged so it can guide there. I'm sure someone will bring it up so I'll explain it now - I am more than aware of the USN's Mk 27 torpedo. Some things get changed for the game anyway - but the 'best' version of the Mk 27 - the mod 4, tops out at 15.9 knots with 128 pounds of TPX - The Mk 14 mod 3, the standard submarine torpedo - did 30 knots with 668 pounds of TPX. Also keep in mind the Mod 4 is post war - the 1100 made during the war had a speed of 12 knots and 95 lbs of TPX. Where as on the German side The difference between a homing electric G7 and a standard electric G7 is 20 (T4)-25(T5/11) knots and a 440 lb charge vs 30 knots with a 617+ lb charge. That is why at this point I'm omitting the Mk 27 from the USN subs. I'm also aware of the Mk 28 that basically entered service in 1945 and is based on captured G7e torpedoes - But with less range and depending on model of G7 speed as well. If we did actually give USN 2 lines of subs, they can field an extra technically, then sure, give one homing torps as a sub/DD hunter-killer. But generally speaking - I feel homing torps on USN is something that should generally be reserved to some premium/freemeium ships. Surface combat and Weapons in general - Submarines should be able to at minimum use their bow tubes on the surface, ideally - both bow and aft. They commonly did in reality and should be the same here. Underwater firing - once again - things that happened that should happen in game with sub vs sub. That said - homing torpedoes would not be able to be used (obvious balance reasons), I'll even say make it standard torpedoes only period. And you have no aim marker whatsoever, you want to shoot at a sub under water, you basically need to make a blind shot like you would in the real thing. Deck guns - should be operational. Are they going to be super effective - no, but they are only ineffective if you make them so. 3-5 inch guns as it is have decent RoF in game, Germany in particular used incendiary shells, you may not do a ton but if your stuck on the surface - with increased pen, already high rate of fire and fire chance the guns may at least do SOMETHING. That and, unless your in something like XXI or Tang - your not spending 10 minutes watching 2 subs circle trying to get a torpedo shot because the damn deck guns don't work. AA - once again, I don't care that normally, it's near useless - I'll even say I don't care if we use the deck guns to fire flak at this point but as soon as we balance AA DPS on ships and plane HP - these too should have decent enough DPS to not be completely defenseless. CV's would still be a major threat if caught alone, but they may at least do some damage if they have any AA. Torpedo Tubes and Reload - As is it should be 1/2 selects what torpedo type goes in the forward tubes, and 3/4 the rear tubes. And it's all the tubes not half, or 1/3 or any of the other weird things I've seen when I played Halloween subs and seen in testing. However - they should operate the same as Halloween subs did in that you can fire them one by one, and fire them as they reload (IE, you fire a 6 torp spread and 40 seconds later you see a DD charging you and 1-2 torpedoes of the 6 have reloaded and you fire them before diving deep away from it). If Wargaming wants to make them like DD torps, namely UK, where you can choose between single and group fire - that's fine as well. That's one element I think Halloween subs did way better it just needed the all forward or rear tubes bit. Submarines and how they play generally - Once again places I have the unpopular opinion. I feel like they should have the same general evolution that they actually had in reality - with the tier 5's being a bit more like DD's that just use diving instead, but as you go through tiers they can operate longer and longer underwater, till you get to the more works underwater than on it types. Which also in that realm - especially the lower tier ones that spend a bit more time on the surface the surface aiming point should be more accurate than underwater. But again, my opinion. ASW - This still needs some work. The 'hydrophone' DD's have, like I've said before, should be like the one subs's have, but only work if the sub is not on the surface or periscope depth, not a sub only RPF. If the AA interferes with it being on the compass, maybe make a new element that just has that. Maybe next to the mini map. There should be a way to evade the passive hydro - namely 'running silent'. Much like when a DD uses smoke on the surface at 1/4 speed the hydrophone stops updating location. If a player knows the ring ranges, they may be able to guess and still drop on you, but there is a chance you can get out of range undetected. That said - Oxygen will be a factor as you travel at a slow speed so it likely won't be an absolute get out of jail free card that can be abused. Depth Charges - They still seem a bit too powerful. I get you may need to take out a sub underwater, but seems a bit much. I mean surviving several hundred depth charges for gameplay reasons is a bit too much but so generally does the ease a DD has of destroying with them based on what I saw. ASW carriers - This is going to be a short version because I'm still on design and concept, still need to figure things out and test it but the basics of what I have. Essentially this will be a separate evens only branch of CV's from the normal ones. In the case of USN - Tier 4 Long Island/Charger, Tier 6 Bogue, Tier 8 Casablanca, and tier 10 Commencement Bay - though they will likely need some buffs to speed. If it isn't already applied to fleet carriers, these won't have 3d spotting - only so where something is on the mini-map. The groups will be a bit smaller and the weapons better geared towards attacking a submarine and to a lesser extent DD's (weapons good vs subs kinda overlap with DD's) but generally far less effective vs most cruisers and BB's - they can still do something, they just take far longer to wear one down. Generally the idea is to lower the impact of these enough to NOT require mirrored MM similar to the other classes. Arguably as much or less than a DD. Planes with the more generic ordnance (rockets/bombs) would be normal, where as ones with more specialized weapons like depth charges the planes would have a shorter range detector (If DD's are say 5 km, the planes would be 2.5-3 km) to try and find them and attack if not on the surface. What I have so far, little as it is - USN Standard weapon - 3.5 or 5" rockets (multiple aircraft) Standard weapon - 500 lb or less bombs Specialized - Depth charges (confirmed for TBF/M), generally 4 per plane. Usefulness vs ships likely limited to certain incapacitations (Rudder, propulsion most likely) and perhaps flooding. Ship damage is debatable, possibly based around type (depth charges from planes are also smaller than the ones from a DD) Specialized - Mk 24 'mine'. In actuality the Mk 24 aerial dropped homing torpedo that was the basis for the Mk 27. While not great for use in game for anti-shipping, or really even reality, but is suitable for anti-sub work. It could still be used on say a CL/A/BB/CV but odds are other than maybe a very light CL like say Atlanta (that's basically a DD with a citadel) isn't going to do a ton of damage. That said standard torpedo damage for USN planes is around 5k I think, this would likely be around 1k. Basic defense for subs would be to run and dive - the torpedo should not be too much faster than them, and not work below say the first level after periscope (or the equivalent that existed in Halloween last year) depending on given agility maneuvers could likely shake them too, and don't expect these to have a very long run time. UK Generally seems to be rockets, depth charges and bombs. Adding a bit of flavour seems like either A: options in rockets (HE, had a dedicated ASW AP rocket), B: AP rocket standard but if hits the water curves up so a near miss may be a hit that could cause flooding to a sub, C: the fact that they generally would have 250 lb DC on planes so something like the Swordfish and others can carry 6 or more of those (depending on plane) as opposed to USN's 4x 350lbs, or maybe an option for fewer 450 lb DC, or D: some combination of A and C. IJN Other than strafing a submarine (which if they finally added strafing I'm sure everyone would go 'I want it too') all they had historically was bombs. Me personally I'm fine with this but Wargaming and possibly the player base wouldn't be. Beyond that it's Type 5 Number 1 Mark 9 mod 1 ASW rockets (experimental), an aircraft use version of the type 4 Depth Charge (contact detonation or self destruct at 200 meters -experimental only), or an undesignated type of DC that was an 'Acoustic Depth Charge' in which only the drawing and idea are confirmed to exist but no prototype. Unless we give them some kind of nerfed DWT that might hit a sub a bit deeper - not sure what to do there, if anything. Japan was way behind in the ASW department. Anyway - that's my current thoughts, hopefully if there is a round 3 I can get in to that one - rather have full hands on experience rather than just footage. I don't think we need to super gimmick subs with this ping system unless we want to get in to more the 50's when you have more development of active acoustic guidance, tech tree that has some of the other subs would be nice and well, subs should function on the surface too.
  22. Florendo19

    How might ASW work

    So I was wondering how ASW would be added to existing ships. It has been noted many times on this forum that many ship models include depth charges. There are however several other forms of ASW weapons that could be available to the time period of WOWS. DD: The most notable weapons for DDs would be hedgehog or squid like forward launchers on allied ships. I would propose that some DDs be given the choice to choose a ASW role by selecting a different hull that sacrifices a gun turret for a launcher and gets a sonar consumable (because I assume this will be a consumable) CV: Those odd tier CVs can make a comeback with FIDO air droped homing torpedoes and Sonobuoys as additions to their ASW capabilities BB: Ramming seems like the best option here but BBs with aircraft handling capabilities may be able to trade a spotter or fighter for ASW planes. Of course, while using this ASW aircraft, the ship would act like a CV hull on auto pilot and the plane would be controlled like CV planes. CA/CL: Some have depth charges but ramming could also be an option. Again Cruisers with aircraft handling capabilities could have ASW aircraft like BBs. IJN Tone class CAs could be an interesting development here DE: While Destroyer Escorts are not currently part of the game, they were generally the most specialized ASW ships. While they would have the weakest anti ship armament, they would have powerful ASW capabilities and probably slightly lower than DD concealment. Convoy Modes: WG has previously mentioned that they are testing two Convoy modes on the Dev blog on August 1, 2019. I think these modes would be made especially for Subs and ASW. Here is the post from the Dev blog ST, game modes. There will be a closed test of two new game modes. They both are based on the idea of escorting of the allied convoy of bot ships. Please note that these are conceptions of the game modes and their rules may change significantly. In the 'Convoys A' mode both teams have the same objective - be the first to escort the indestructible bot ship from the team spawn to the destination point on the fixed route. The ship moves by itself, but if the allies are nearby, they will slowly regenerate HP and the bot will move faster. Any player's ship, except aircraft carriers, can, after being destroyed, respawn near the convoy route a maximum of twice per battle. The routes are symmetrical and there are parts when teams have to come close to each other. Teams are composed of 6, 7 or 12 players. There are two rounds in the 'Convoys B' mode. In the first round, one of the teams (defenders) escorts the convoy of three armed ships along the fixed route. The task of the attacking team is to destroy these ships in a limited time. Teams change their objectives in the second round. The team that escorts their ship further than the opposition wins the battle. The player's ship respawns after being destroyed. The attackers respawn faster and may choose one of the spawn points, and defenders get back into battle near the convoy. If there are ships of the defending team near the convoy ships, then both they and the convoy regenerate their HP. Both teams consist of 7 players. Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary.
  23. With the possibility of submarines being added to regular game play at sometime in the future, would it be in the player's interest for WG to add a DE (Destroyer Escort) class of ship optimized specifically for ASW? Many of these ships were constructed between 1942 and 1944 and were used for ASW as well as AA and Radar pickets. They could be added for Tier7 and above using the Buckley and Cannon classes for the USN, The River class Frigates for RN and Commonwealth, the Flottenbegleiter or F-class for the Kriegsmarine and the Kaibokan class for the IJN. I've even thought about a Premium DE ship that I think would be excellent candidate. The USS England DE-635 was a WWII destroyer escort that is steeped in naval history. It was named for Ensign John C. England who was killed while rescuing fellow crewman from the USS Oklahoma during the attack at Pearl Harbor. The ship also has the distinction of being the only USN ship that sunk six Japanese subs during a 12 day period, which won her a Presidential Unit Citation. Anyway, those are my rough thoughts about ASW ships countering subs. I'd like to know what the rest of you think?