Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'submarines'.

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
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 38 results

  1. The great submarine debate

    The great submarine debate I think we finally had a breakthrough on this subject in my last thread. But first attempts to shout the discussion down or insult ideas on either side will result in my ignoring you. The arguments against submarines currently being debated. They are impossible to balance! Subs have many facets that allow balance, underwater time surface time, sight distance,etc. They are invincible underwater! Nope, they are invisible only guns and bombs won’t effect them. Depth charges and torpedoes still will as well as ramming. Battleships can’t attack them! While they are under this is true underwater they will surface and become an easy kill for your secondaries also Battleships have deep hulls which means ramming a submerged sub is possible. They will be boring! This is opinion I find B.B. and CVs boring most of the time. They won’t add anything to the game! They will help with the current meta issue of ship staying static and not moving. They aren’t realistic! Nothing in this game is truly realistic. They will win by survival causing me to lose! Back the day when ties were possible yes ties aren’t possible.
  2. What if Wargaming were to introduce submarines to the game, kind of like the French BB and the American cruiser arc, with the end reward being Grand Admiral Donitz, the man who got the whole u-boat scene underway? The possibilities would be endless. They wouldn't be overpowered, as they would be prone to hydroacoustic search and radar (when surfaced), and their speed would make them the slowest vehicle in the game at higher tiers. There could be a limited dive time, as well as a very small aerial spotting range. A simple strategy could be sailing into a cap, where a dd could lay a smoke screen when the sub has to surface. The wolf pack divisions would be hilariously cool.
  3. Submarines (here comes the hellfire)

    Next time you get mad at something relating to this- Think about her- I hope you feel bad now XX_Emeraldking_XX
  4. My Silly new ship line: Submarine tenders

    So I have seen several of warships recent postings about the world war 2 submarines, and was thinking, "If wargames did want to use submarines, how would they do it?" Submarines were very slow and could easily be destroyed by any other ships of the game if they were spotted, not to mention that their only weapons were their torpedoes and in WoWs, torps can't always do so much. Most likely, the person controlling the submarine would manage to get one torpedo salvo off before what ever it was taking on would sink it with secondaries or its main guns, as subs were extremely slow ships that even a battleship could outrun. Then I remembered that Wargames April fools joke about a dolphin carrier, and thought, wouldn't that be interesting if instead of dolphins, you had submarines, and that is where this silly idea started. So to start off, this is how I would see this line work. For me, I would borrow from the carrier line, where every person that plays the submarine line would have a tender ship that would send the submarines out to attack the ships. Starting from rank 3, branching off of the destroyer line, Each tender would be able to send out two squads of submarines similar to how the aircraft carrier sends out his planes, by assigning a squad of subs to a number key and would follow an automated path set in the map screen, but tender players would have to be more careful then with an aircraft carrier, as subs are not really well known for being able to go over islands. The AI of them would have to be improved so that they wouldn't pull "Notsers" into islands when they were moving. As to the fact that the player would be able to control two or more squads of submarines takes to the fact that when a submarine is on the surface, they are easy targets for surface ships to take out. I would say that most likely, the the highest subs would have about half the health of what is usually on a destroyer, making it so that even Non-gun destroyers would have easy time taking out a submarines that would be on the surface. That would be why the there would be two or more squads of submarines so that if one squad of submarine was lost in the opening minutes of a game, the player would still be viable with a second squad. Also it would be possible for the tender to have a third or fourth submarine squad that could replace a lost squad of submarines. Though this is very much like how the aircraft carrier is played, it would be very different, as ships would be able to use there main guns to destroy the squads. Submarines were well known for their ability to submerge into the water and go undetected by surface ships. This would be achieved in game for the submarines by pressing the number assigned to the squad to cause the submarine to submerge into the water. This would be a positive and negative at the same time for the submarine. It would be a positive, as the submarine would be able to not be detected by a surface ship, or plane, similar to smoke, and wouldn't be able to take fire from main caliber guns but going submerged would cause the submarine to move half its surface speed and wouldn't be able to detect surface ships as far as it would if it was on the surface. Also being submerged wouldn't be able to stop a cruiser from hydro'ing or radaring the sub, and torpedoes would still be able to hit them, especially deepwater torps, so destroyers would be the main adversary for submarines, as well as some cruisers. The submarines would have to surface at some time, to make it so they couldn't just stealth there way to behind enemy lines, but perhaps that could be used as incentive to battleships that even sitting in back wouldn't be so safe to do. But it would be offset by the fact that, the subs would only be able to carry one load of torpedoes on them so after they launched their torps, they would have to return to the submarines tender to restock their torpedoes before they head back out. If they were to go stealthy from firing their torps to getting back to the tender, it could cost them, so they would have to surface to get back to the ship to restock. Also getting hit by anything would render them unable to submerge again. Now comes to the idea of a submarine tender. Submarine tenders would be very weak ships with almost no main guns for firing. They would have to play like an aircraft carrier and sit in the back and run from any enemies that saw it. Also add to the fact that once taken out, the submarines would most likely be taken out as well would render it not the best ship. But then comes the silly idea for them. Not only would they serve as the main ship for the submarine line, they would also act as repair ships. Currently WoWs has AI controlled ships that have the ability to repair damage to ships in certain battles. If players could control the ships, they could use the heal to repair allies that would be damaged by the enemies, as well as any of their submarines that manage to take damage and get back to the ship. They wouldn't be able to fight so much but they would still serve a purpose in a fight as support for allies, and themselves. Now that I am finished with my idea, I already know that it is a stupid idea, and by far is much more unlikely to be put in place then regular submarines being placed into the game, but it was an interesting concept to cross my mind, and I felt like sharing it. Like it or dislike it, I just felt like posting. Have a great day.
  5. Submarines and WOWS.

    Submarines and WOWS. how they might be, if they were. A devil's advocate discussion. This post is not intended as a serious proposal to introduce submarines into World of Warships, but a hypothetical discussion of how they might be, if they were. A devil's advocate discussion. Submarines hold a degree of fascination for many players, and potential players of online games. But they have a troubled and difficult history in MMOs. a) What would the role of submarines in WOWS be? Versus battleships and heavy cruisers, submarines would act as mobile no go zones. Submarines would have a special interest in choke points between islands. Submarines would contest caps. The main targets for submarines would be large warships (Carriers, Battleships and Heavy Cruisers), but they would be targets of opportunity. The main threats to submarines would come from Destroyers and Aircraft Carriers. b) What kind of playstyle/player would submarines attract? Patience and very patient players. Slow, ultra stealthy, submarines would be the antithesis of destroyer gameplay, which attracts nimble players, and which rewards twitch style fps abilities. Submarines would spend most of their time, in battle, lurking near island cover, submerging only when danger near. They would use their concealment options in much the same way as any other class of ship, exchanging the ability to smoke, for the ability to submerge. c) What changes would be required of other ship classes in game, and of the game itself? Many destroyers and cruisers already possess hydro, which would allow for the detection of submerged submarines, a new class of armament would be required and need to be modelled, and tested for dds and some cruisers : of which, depth charges/ Submarines would have a significant effect on destroyer and cv gameplay, mostly because destroyers and cvs would have a new task : hunting submarines. If destroyers would have a new sort of target, battleships would face a new threat, and their gameplay would have to adapt to take account when operating in and near islands. Submarine spawn points would need to take account of their miserably low speed (surfaced) and spawn subs considerably in advance of their team mates. An example : Tier 8, Gato class submarine (with comparison to our tier 8 Benson destroyer) Vitalstatistix HP : 12 800 hitpoints at tier 8, the United States Navy Gato class would be a fair fit, with 1500 tonnes surfaced, and 2000 submerged, her in game HP would be slightly lower than a tier 8 destroyer. A Benson class destroyer had about 1500 tonnes displacement (light load)- used to calculate several of her WOWS attributes, and 12 800 hitpoints, in game. Speed : 21 knots surfaced, 10 knots submerged. The Benson dd, to which I am comparing, has a 38 knot max speed in game, which is itself drawn from the Benson class real life max speed, at light displacement. Concealment : Surface Concealment, 3.5 kilometres, Periscope submerged, 2 km for surface ships, 3 km for airplanes, Fully Submerged concealment, 0 km for surface ships, 3 km for airplanes. The Benson class has 7.38 base concealment, 2 km while in smoke, in game. Armament : 10 x 21 inch tubes, 6 fore, 4 aft, max dmg upgraded 16 000 hp, AA and secondaries (!) 1 x 76mm, Bofors and some .50 cal, captain's sidearm too maybe (ceremonial sword as stock). The Benson also has 10 total torp tubes, dmg numbers are equivalent Consumeables : Oxygen (equivalent to smoke for dds) 90 second cooldown, lasts 1 minute. 3 charges, usable when Fully Submerged. Damage Control Party, Hydroacoustic There are no end of problems and reasons to object to the presence of submarines in game, for many of which I have no answer, (not least the very bad effect they had on a predecessor to World of Warships) but what if? What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith?
  6. Submarines maybe?

    I have played on War Thunder the submarines. So when is this company gonna come out with that kind of vehicle? Guess Gijan has beat them to it. But you know what them submarines are pretty fun and the game play is a bit diffrent. To bad this company hasn't even put anything up trying to show that they are even trying for it. But its sad a company that has a lot less player base in there tank and plane and ship game play but seems to open a new class of fleets of vehicle and playing with that much less of customers to make them money. They actually seem to be a bit cheaper on there prices also but to bad WG cant make it like that. But would be nice to see WG put something together to try to keep up with the competing company's. Maybe a poll will help. But who wants to have submarines?
  7. Yes, I get that this is a joke, but in all seriousness, this is exactly how I proposed they implement subs and/or PT boats: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/dolphin-class/ Basically a Carrier for sea-borne forces, that launches a 'wolf pack' of PT boats or Subs to a target. It means you dont play as the sub, just the Sub Tender/PT boat tender, and thus can evade the issues of sub speed/PT boat range. The subs go under water and 'appear' after a pre-set amount of time within range of your target, or targeted location, and have a limited time to launch an attack, or forced to surface and return to the tender (and thus be susceptible to surface fire). For balancing, give secondary guns a huge boost in accuracy only when firing at subs, and add a new secondary type, depth charges, that fire automatically from a DD that is spotted. There's a way to make this work to add some dynamics to this game AND give DD's something other to do than just spamming torps.
  8. How to add submarines

    So we all been waiting for the introduction of submarines. Realizing this would pose many challenges, here are the ideas I've come up with. Subs research at tier 8 as a branch off of the destroyer lines (example: Benson to Fletcher or sub/or subs start at tier 8 as a side line tree). Survivability - 13000 hp starting at tier 8, increasing by 500-1000 per tier Artillery - Have 1-2 guns with 120mm to 140mm caliber, with ranges of 8-10kms Torpedoes - So this with where torpedoes get unique. Maximum damage of 18000, above water have ranges of 12-14 km with detectability of 1.2 km. Speed of 58 knots. Underwater range and speed would be the same, but detectability would drop to 1km or 0.9km. Reload 110 seconds (without captain skills). However this would seem either good or bad it would only be able to fire 2 torpedoes at a time. AA Defense - wouldn't have any ability Maneuverability - Again this is where some challenges would come up. Above water we could give it something like a top speed 23 knots, RST( rudder shift time) 10 seconds with turning radius of 600m. Now for the underwater stats thing would change a fair amount. Top speed 10 knots , RST 3-5 seconds with turning radius of 300-450m. Concealment - This is a tricky one because this would have to be as good if not better then destroyers. So lets just say its 6 km without upgrades or and captain skills. Now how you counter such a ship, and what type of consumables would it get. Well for consumables it would get damage control, torpedoes reload booster/or hydroacoustic search(range 6-8kms running time of 90seconds), and the important dive consumable. So how would dive work? You would be unable to spot for yourself, however if you had hydroacoustic active you could spot enemies. You would have a choice of picking torpedo reload booster over the hydroacoustics, however you would need you team to spot for you if you pick reload booster. Dive consumable would last for 240 seconds enough time to fire 2 sets of torpedoes, and would get unlimited charges. For the counters, hydroacoustic would be doubled (i.e. standard hydoacoustic 5km, underwater detects 10kms). Pan-Asians destroyers get DWT (deep water torpedoes) so they would be able to strike subs underwater giving them a unique ability over the other destroyers, cause at the moment Pan-Asian destroyers don't have that much going for them. Also CV's would be a very good counter for subs with dive bombers, and torpedo squadrons. So with all this in mind please feel free to add your opinion.
  9. https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2017/03/24/wows-april-fools-submarine-official-stats-pictures/ Because yeah. Someone had fun with this.
  10. Hey, it was on paper as designed, and WG has created ships with less.
  11. Submarines

    I would like to see another addition to the ( World of ) franchise, Let's get World of War Submarines
  12. Anybody know anything about this pic?

    So, true story: I was searching for top view pics of the new De Grasse cruiser when I stumbled across this pic. I couldn't find it specifically referenced nor discussed in any other threads (that I've found so far), and I've been away from the game and the forum for quite some time. When I tried to go to the source page cited by the search result, it says the page the pic is from no longer exists. I don't know if this was photoshopped to trick people or from some beta testing or what. My Russian is a bit rusty so I have no clue what it says. I know some of it is obviously specs, but I'm curious what the other stuff means. That said, does anybody know what the heck this is or what the story is behind it?
  13. Post an update to this sign whenever a new submarine post or thread is spotted. I'm curious to know how long we can go between Submarines resurfacing on the forum. Since this is about Subs, the count is reset today. Feel free to customize/edit the sign when posting an update.
  14. Submarines

    Why are submarines not in world of warships? A submarine is a warship according to my studies. They would be a good counter against carriers and battleships. Limits on Submarines in the game. - It can only capture points while on the surface - Not be able to go close to land while submerged - Ability to use deck guns - limited time below water due to batteries and oxygen - Fast on the surface and slow while submerged
  15. Both my friend and I tried to play a game together, but once we selected the submarine for the April Fool's day mode, our games became unresponsive. Multiple restarts have done nothing to solve the problem, and short of a full reinstall I'm out of ideas. Heck, I don't know if that would fix it. The game loading icon just perpetually sits there, and we are only able to access the sub's commander screen, and open a few drop down/right click menus.
  16. Hi All! Hangglide42 here with a thought exercise in celebration of WOWS placement of a (for some a much requested) Submarine in our port for 10 days in celebration of April Fools Day. Before we get started - so that this thread does not become a religious war, I want to add a disclaimer that my personal belief that a submarine meta would actually be quite disruptive to the game balance if not done very carefully (if at all) and I don't personally want to see Subs introduced into the current game structure (I'd rather see issues w/ CVs & their gameplay mode improved first). Also, since I come at this from a historical interest , the hypothetical that follows, tries to do a WG style mapping of real history onto the in-game ships and play mechanics. So - how could historical subs be mapped into WOWS in line with the current game structure? Well... First...the History Contrary to what a lot of posters may believe, WWII era submarines were not true submarines in the current sense of how our nuclear submarines work today (i.e. true submarines, remaining completely submerged for the length of their patrols). Rather, WWI/WWII era subs were actually submersible surface ships which sailed mainly on the surface and submerged only, if needed, to attack or evade attack for as short a period of time as necessary. This was necessitated since the primary submarine power plants were diesel engines which required lots of air to run (later in the war, snorkel devices were used so subs could run their diesels underwater with the snorkel providing air at periscope depth). Once submerged, the subs had to use a different power system that was air-independent based on batteries which had a limited charge. As a result, WWII-era subs topped out at about 18-21 kts when running on the surface ontheir diesels and 4-7 kts underwater running on batteries. Also, while it's true that the length of the underwater stay would result in oxygen depletion, in most cases, except when playing dead to avoid a DD attack on it, the battery life was what motivated subs to operate on the surface, rather than the O2 limit. Even creeping along at 4 kts underwater, the sub's batteries would deplete very quickly. In WWII - surface ships (i.e. DDs) also had 2 primary types of attack systems to deal with submerged submarines - of course, while on the surface, guns were fine. Historically, the US DD Ward shot, hit and sunk one of the midget submarines that were trying to sneak into Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7 - when they found the wreck a few years ago, the shell hole was clearly visible in the mini-sub's conning tower. The main underwater weapons of attack were either depth charges or ahead firing mortar weapons (i.e. Hedgehogs or Squids). Depth charges, which are usually what's depicted in countless WWII movies, were essentially large barrel shaped containers containing hundreds of pounds of explosive that was triggered by a pressure depth sensor. The sailors on the DDs would have to set a predicted depth for the charge to explode at prior to deploying. The DD's attack strategy would be to "lay a pattern" of depth charges using its stern mounted racks (they were rolled off the stern) and its side mounted mortar systems (i.e. K-guns & Y-guns) as the DD sailed over a sub's submerged position. The depth charge had a large explosive charge and didn't need to hit the sub to damage it (the pressure bubble created by an underwater explosion could seriously damage (if it was close enough) or kill a sub (if it exploded below the sub and broke it's keel). The down-side of the depth charge is that because it always detonated, any sonar picture that was detecting the sub was temporarily disturbed and the sub could sneak away. DDs would always have to reacquire the sub after a depth charge run. The mortar systems such as the Hedgehog, used a multitude of bomblets that were fired in a pattern ahead of the DD when the sub was detected, over the sub's predicted course. The explosive charge for each bomblet was far smaller than 100 lb, and they were contact charges (i.e. they either hit the sub and exploded or it didn't explode at all). Also, there was no depth setting needed as the charge either it something in it fall thru the water column or it didn't. As a result, the mortar systems were arguably better because the hunting DD could always keep their sonar picture of the submerged sub until the sub was actually hit (when the explosion would disrupt the sonar picture as in the depth charge case). During WWII the US DE England gained fame for a series of Hunter Killer battles what resulted in the sinking of 5 Japanese submarines using this weapon system. A (Theoretical) WOWS Sub Implementation So - given this historical basis, how could subs "work" within WOWS game mechanics? WG has tried to simplify certain real-world analogs (e.g. hydro) so the assumption is that WG would do the same with the intricacies of actually attacking w/ subs and also the complexities of hunting and killing them. Subs would be mainly surface running vessels with a top speed of 18 knots and would use this speed to do it's main transit to the battle area and maneuvering in game. The Sub's submergence capability would be a temporary stealth measure analogous to our in-game smokescreen. Thus, it would be modeled as an in-game consummable - the capability would have a limited submergence time (i.e. modeled battery life/O2 limits) and a cooldown before the sub can submerge again (i.e. modeled after the need for surface running recharge time for the batteries). Like the Damage Control consummable, this would have as many Submergence charges as game-time allows given the cool-down period. The detection mechanism for Submarines would be a form of extension to the Hydro capability existing in-game. For simplicity, there would be no distinction between passive & active sonar models since passive sonar is predicated on "detect w/o being detected" which is beyond the current game model today. It can be argued that the current hydro is a hybrid (i.e. you hear a periodic pinging when you pop hydro - which could map to why you can see a DD stopped in smoke (i.e. after it's theoretically having "gone silent") - while detecting torps could indicate a passive detection) A Submarines torpedo firing/reload times can be modeled appropriately after how DDs have their torpedo firing/reload periods. In a similar departure from history, as w/ the DDs, they would have infinite torpedo reloads. (For those wondering about this comment - most DDs you see in game had at most 1 torpedo reload on the actual ships - so the torpedo spamming you see in game would never happen in real life. Also for game mapping purposes - for those unhappy w/ the 2 min DD torp reload wait, real DDs took at best at least 10-30 mins to reload their real torpedoes). Also, real WWII submarines carried 20 or fewer torpedoes including both fore and aft torpedo rooms (many WWII subs could fire torpedoes from both ends - the US Gato class had 6 TT doors facing forward and 4 TT doors facing aft). Hedgehog is easier to fit in-game than a depth charge meta. The Hedgehog can be a modeled on how CV dive bombers work today (w/ the same RNG issues). The DD is essentially trying to lay a pattern of Hedgehogs down across the predicted underwater path of the sub. Depth charges bring in additional game complexity which could be avoided altogether (since WG would have to introduce a depth model for their maps and control system for both Subs & DDs setting their attach). In both cases, armament reuse can be modeled as a combination of weapon reload (i.e. reloading a charge on K-guns, resetting depth triggers on depth charges, or reloading the small array charges on a Hedgehog or Mousetrap). Problems & Issues The primary problem w/ any submarine implementation is that it violates the "rock-paper-scissors" model of WOWS in which any ship class can kill any other. Historically, only DD classes had the means and weaponry to kill subs, tho CVs (particularly Escort Carriers) had the ability to prosecute the contact (i.e. attack it), but not the sensors to detect them. Since you really only have 1 class to counter subs, this is definitely a April Fools thought exercise re: subs, not an actual proposal to get them in game. 18-21 kts is very slow for any ship once you get beyond TIer III. Only one class of sub in WWII could achieve slightly higher speeds and a much higher underwater speed than 4-7 kts - this was the German Type XXI which came late in the war, however, was not really a factor due to technical issues and how late they appeared. The Type XXIs had revolutionary streamlining and certain models had a hugely increased battery capacity or an early (and not fully successful) attempt at a very dangerous air-independent hydrogen-peroxide powered underwater propulsion system to somewhat replace the shortcoming of battery systems. (If you were curious, the type of sub one thinks of as the stereotypical German U-boat from WWII was a Type VII. The Sonar detection model would mean changes and tweaks to the current Hydro concept that may disrupt game balance (i.e. all DDs now need to get hydro). Also, in addition to the bloom in hydro-equipped ships, the consummable model may have to be modified since you're now DDs hunting submerged subs for attack, in addition to CL/CAs/BBs using hydro to spot smoked DDs. If WG does a Submarine line - the more advanced Subs would likely have access to snorkel devices allowing them slightly higher underwater speeds and longer submerged duration. This would further complicate a hydro consummable model since it would be needed longer in-game. Well, there you have it, the history - a possible model for in-game play - Happy April Fools Day to All! A complete list of Forum Articles in the links below can be found in WOWS Enjoyment - List of Forum Articles & Guides.
  17. I detected this and wanted to SHARE y'all...
  18. Add submarines to the game!

    100% Clickbait This is more of a proposal about random events in convoy scenario game mode we can see coming, to be specific, random events to target specific class of ships among players to disrupt the normal progression of mission. One of the most devastating factors that lead to failures in Halloween game modes is the complete loss of one class of ships, and most of the time, destroyers. The catapults and the zikasas in the halloween game mode are examples of this, punishing failure in prioritizing targets, lack of situational awareness and reckless attacks, and I believe in the upcoming convoy mode, this ship be extended further for other ship class too. Several AI element with historical basis can be implemented, surveillance stations and forts are a good starts, land based torpedo launchers(*coughbluchercough*), concentrated airstrikes, and, of course, coordinated submarine ambushes can add more flavors to the game, demanding the cruisers to participate more as escorts and guardians, and less as independent raiders. AI driven submarines won't mind being deleted one shot, so the fragility of submarines can be mitigated this way. As for the devastating firepower, friendly spotting by destroyers, cruisers (and op high tier German bb hydroacoustic f*ckery!sorry a bit of salt here)can mitigate this factor. This also adds variety to the game, including new armaments, like depth charges, anti-sub mortars and rockets, and fleet formation(dds recon ahead, cruisers on the second line and bbs stay nearest to objective) What do you guys think?
  19. ACHTUNG! Crash DIVE!

  20. Submarines in WOWS?

    I know I will likely catch a lot of flak for this, but I see it as a great idea. With a lot of new ships coming with the radar consumable and dds no longer being able to conceal themselves as well, this could be a great new role for them to play. It would also mean a whole new class of ship that played a MAJOR part in ww2. I will explain how I think subs could be introduced below and how they could be perfectly balanced, taking lessons from how they are implemented in Battlestations. 1. subs could only stay submereged for about 2-5mins at a time and would have to regularly re surface to take on oxygen for the crew "like in battlestations" this way SS players would have to be knowledgeable of when they should dive and when to stay on the surface. 2. subs would only be able to cap points when they are surfaced. this way there is no "stealth capping." 3. subs would travel a lot slower submereged 20-25 knots max, and faster on the suface. This way SS captains would have to track ships and be in the right place at the right time to carry out successful torpedo attacks. 4. dds could have functioning depth charges and sonar added to enable them to go "sub hunting." "I believe this is a great way to add another ship type to the game." Just curious what my fellow players think?
  21. Perhaps this is why CVs (particularly USN CVs [[which are utter garbage until T9 (((minus bogue + saipan))]] have been getting no attention. ARP I-401 is now in ARP list of ships in the tech tree.
  22. Played a match a few minutes ago and managed to capture this. Sneaky, sneaky submarine battleship. edit: How do i post imagur album? It isn't showing up and the forum said that the images are to big.
  23. PvE Implementation of Subs

    To start, I don't think subs should ever be introduced into PvP. Never-[edited]-ever. However, as this is a game where we celebrate the warships of yesteryear, I think including subs for the sake of their own enjoyment is something that could be considered. WG official word on subs ingame is starting to get weird. A Q&A before the most recent Himmelsdorf said that they've said no to things before and yet here they are with those things (I don't remember specifics), so who knows about subs. The most recent Himmelsdorf Q&A tried to cover up very soft 'maybe' as a translation error. Obviously, they're thinking about it, which is interesting by itself. Some MMOs I've played feature some sort of mini-game or alternate game aspect. Sometimes it's just the devs screwing around, sometimes it's a pet project the devs want to see have a little impact on the rest of the game. Here's my idea (which someone else probably already suggested months ago): The Weekly Supply Raid Every week, players would get a chance to play as a sub that, well, raids fictional enemy supply lines. You would be placed under a 20 minute timer and your goal is to sink up to three supply ships. These supply ships are, of course, guarded by destroyers and CL flotilla leaders. Killing the escort ships would render only a little xp and silver, as your main targets are the the supply vessels. The supply vessels themselves would be commerce ships (Cimarron), Munition ships (Michael Bay approved), or CVEs/Plane Tenders ferrying planes (so no active planes). The mission fails if you die or if you fail to kill any commerce ships before the timer runs out. You succeed if you kill one or more of the ships and survive to the end of the timer. Killing all three before timer is up is an automatic victory. Here's the motivation: Killing a supply ship yields increasing free xp, silver, and small reward bundles: 1st ship: 3 packs of random signal flags, 6x in each pack. 2nd ship: 2 packs of random premium consumables, 6x in each pack 3rd ship: 6x Premium/Ranked Camo (I think they have the same bonuses, Ranked just looks cooler) Why 6 items? Because 3 games usually translates into about 1 hour of play. Ideally, WG wants an average of 15 min games, but I figure most people screw around in port or with something else after each match rather than spamming the 'Battle On' button, and of course games can go over 15 minutes. So killing each ship gives a player roughly 2 hours of bonuses. It could be more, could be less, I'm just trying to create a workable figure that fits into WG's vision for their game that isn't completely arbitrary. Alternatively, the standard 10x packs could also be an award. I figure that subs would work like this in their most basic implementation: 1: You have bow (and maybe aft) torpedo arcs. 2. You have 3 stages of depth: Surfaced (can be spotted normally and fired upon); Shallow dive (you can see, but only with a binocular view and you can be torped); Full Dive (you can't see anything, but only depth charges can hurt you). Further, you're slow when submerged and you can't stay submerged indefinitely. 3. You have Hydroacoustics, but using this reveals your position as well as the enemies in close proximity. You would likely use this if you think you're near a supply ship while at full dive. 4. You have a deck gun (or guns), but you'll probably die trying to outgun even an IJN DD (unless you're this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_M1) I imagine the game playing out as the supply convoy is slowly making their way from one edge of the map to the other, preferably on a map with a day and night cycle for atmosphere (not necessarily Triton). Through the map, you would try to hound and intercept the convoy at decent ambush points. Once the first enemy ship is destroyed, supply ship or not, the enemy escort would break off and start searching for you. Not all ships in WWII were equipped with sonar and I think this should also be reflected that only certain enemy ships will have HA. Even though killing enemy ships won't be as rewarding as the supply ships, removing the escorts that you think are the biggest threat will make things easier when picking off the rest of the convoy. I mentioned depth charges, and that would be something that would have to be implemented. How it would, I'm not sure. Maybe just steal Steel Ocean's depth charge mechanics (not advertising, the game sucks, aside from a few interesting mechanics) Even though it's weekly, you could repeat the mission just for fun for just small silver/xp rewards and practice. The subs themselves could accrue xp, not necessarily for modules but maybe for unlocking other types of subs, just for the sake of screwing around and having fun with them. Obviously, this would require, well, work. The devs have stated numerous times that the engine isn't built for Z-axis warfare, so implementation of subs would be a real PITA. And that's probably the main reason they've been so adamant about it, because it's just too much effort/expenditure to make something of dubious gameplay value work with the rest of the game. To finish off, I'm not sub fanboy. If they never implement subs, I couldn't care less. this was just an idea I had floating around in my head that I feel would be the only sensible way to implement subs into the game to highlight their lone wolf style of warfare, that would also be at least sort of fun. As has been stated multiple times, subs are not fleet vessels. Their implementation into PvP would either result in a class that's basically a really terrible DD line, or a source of arbitrary, unavoidable damage worse than pre-nerf CVs or both. And that's just not good for the game as it stands right now. In addition, I would much rather have the various Navies of import finished (RN, FS, DKM DDs, with a pinch of Regalia Marina Prems) before something like this would be considered, a sort of "What else is there to add?" "...Subs?" I'm ready for the flames.
  24. So they are going to do a short TV series to take up where the movie left off. http://m.dw.com/en/classic-german-film-das-boot-to-be-continued-as-tv-series/a-19349613