Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'subs'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 18 results

  1. 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?
  2. _RC1138

    Submarine Trees

    So with most people seemingly embracing subs as fun, and, while of course tweaks would be needed (I mean in general, do any of the ships in the Halloween Ops work 1:1 the way normal ships in normal modes work?) I think it can be safe to say that Wargaming has proven that, within the established mechanics, subs can work. The rest, aka the most difficult part, is balancing between each other/other classes/broader rebalancing around them. But let's pretend, for a moment, such a thing is 'easy' and rectified; what do you see the tech trees looking like? When you stop and consider it, there are actually an abnormally high amount of sub classes and members of those classes, to say nothing of famous outliers like the Surcouf. And yes, there are MORE than enough subs for a few nations (US and RN especially) to have more than 1 line (how they would differentiate them, perhaps with different torp types or things of that nature, is anyones' guess). The beautiful thing about subs is, baring a few cases, almost NO paper ships are required, more than can be said of almost ANY surface ship line. Now the trees I propose, obviously take with a grain of salt, are predicated on one common idea: that *historical* submarine speeds will not be adhered to and instead artificial speeds will be chosen on the basis of balance; so for example a Gato couldn't go at 27 knots on the surface, but for balance purposes, if it's at T8/9, it probably should. My justification for this change? If DD's can get unlimited torps (as would subs), and DD's get stealth field generators, and BB's get (mostly) the unique ability to heal, and (soon) CV's will have unlimited planes, and it's HE, not AP, that starts fires, and the million or so OTHER things ignored for balance purposes, I feel giving subs a little kick in the [edited]for surface speeds is NOT a huge ask. So to start, because I know this is where WGing would, my proposed RU Sub tree is as follows: Tier III: Osetr Class; a good semi-mini Sub with 3 tubes, 2 fore, 1 aft, typical of what I assume a TIII sub would have to be (much like how TIII DD's are). Tier IV: My gut says the Akula, but they may want that for a Premium, so failing that the Kaiman class could fit at T4, although it's still more of a mini-sub than a full patrol sub. Tier V: Bars Class; about as big of a WWI sub as you'd expect to see and slow diving will make her interesting at T5 Tier VI: Dekabrist Class; very likely the T6 (in fact the one I am most sure of) as this is kinda exactly what a Post WWI RU Sub would be expected to be like; for reference, it's very close to an S-Boat in capability, and was fairly modern in design for the time. Tier VII: Shchuka Class; solid Tier VII; very much a pre-War boat, not flashy, but fairly modern layout for the year of launch Tier VIII: S-Class; basically a German Type IX. This isn't supposition either; these boats were developed alongside Germany and really were basically a Soviet made Type IX. Likely a solid T8 based on the size of the torp armament and the assumed jump in underwater ability/range Tier IX: K-Class; honestly this is a tough one; they were great boats, but at TIX might be a bit too far for them. It's not hard to expect Russian subs to get some fantasy upgrades beyond that of their peers, but the K-Class is tough to place; either a strong T8 or a weak T9. The Whiskey, although much newer, could fit here with the Zulu after but that might require some downgrading. Tier X: Zulu Class; I imagine most of the Tier X's would be soon-ish post war designs, and most, if not all, of them will CLOSELY resemble the Type XXI's, because of how influential these were, and the Zulu's are basically the Soviet version of the Type XXI. If the Zulu's are too large/too many tubes, then a Whiskey Class can fit in snugly for largely the same reasons. Royal Navy Tier III: D-Class; heavier than most Tier 3's but it can be balanced with so-so torps Tier IV: E-Class; stereotypical WWI era RN Boat Tier V: L-Class; On par with other Tier V's, especially by having the RN Mk II 21" Torp Tier VI: S-Class; one of the most work-horse like subs in the world Tier VII: T-Class; a hard to maneuver but hard hitting Alpha strike capable sub Tier VIII: V-Class; what else would be the RN T8? Tier IX: Amphion Class; about as heavy of a WWII sub as you're going to find outside an Axis Nation Tier X: Again, as usual, it's a Type XXI derivative, the Porpoise Class KM Tier III: Has to be U1. A bit underpowered for Tier III? Yep, but the first German boat HAS to be the U1. Tier IV: Type 19; ironically a bit more powerful perhaps than the other Tier 4's (and more flexiable with equal aft and fore tubes) Tier V: Type UBIII; heavy for a Tier V with a big old deck gun, but this is the stereotypical WWI era U-Boat. Tier VI: Type IA; although newer than most T6 boats, she was basically a rebuild of WWI era boats Tier VII: This is the tough spot. Do you make it the Type VIIC? Is a Type VIIC op for Tier 7? It might be, but here it goes Tier VIII: If the Type VIIC is too strong for T7, then it goes here (with the Type IID at T7); otherwise, this might be the only Paper sub needed; either a Type VIII or Type IX with some kind of downgrade for balance Tier IX: Type IXC; similar to, but far more flexible than, the Gato class. Tier X: Obviously, the Type XXI; it keeps coming up for a reason USN Tier III: C-Class; oh how I want the Holland to be in the game, but the sad fact is she would struggle at T2, much less T3; the C-Class is the earliest USN Sub class that resembles a WWI era sub Tier IV: L-Class; rare Tier IV with a deck gun (which I think will be the US 'thing') Tier V: S-Class; these were great boats, serving all the way into WWII. Could be OP for T5 depending on how they are implemented (otherwise it would be an R at T5 and the S at T6). Tier VI: Salmon Class: This is when the US started designing boats as 'Fleet Boats' and were comparatively heavier armed than most other nations. Tier VII: Tambor Class; very heavy torp armament for a T6 and super long ranged, probably one of the most successful interwar Subs Tier VIII: Gato; yeah this one's tough too, as a Gato can be tuned to be very powerful at T8 or T9, but I think of T8 as when the 'real' ships show up and future USN Subs followed the Gato (with a Guppy upgrade) example for many decades to follow Tier IX: Balao w/ Guppy IIA upgrade; while technically post war, compared to other T9's this sub will be trading any chance of AA/surface fighting ability for longer undersea time w/ the USN standard of very heavy armaments Tier X: Part of me really thinks it should be the Nautilus, although balancing an SSN at even TX would be hard due to 'unlimited' dive time (but for fairness, light for T10 torp armaments to say nothing of being oversized and an easier target). There might be a way to do it but that's up to WGing, the Tang-Class is the most appropriate probably because, you guessed it, it's basically an americanized Type XXI. IJN Tier III: You *maybe* could do a Type I, with some futzing with torps/spotting to make it fair, otherwise it's a bit underpowered at T3; it's basically a Holland (spoiler alert: until ~WWII, almost all IJN subs are basically 1:1 copies of foreign made subs) Tier IV: Ha-3 Class; a C-Class (Royal Navy) sub. Very much what I would expect a Tier 4 Tier V: Ha-7 Class; Basically a home-made Ha-3; give it better torps Tier VI: S7 Type; kinda small, but it gets Type 93's so it's hard to complain Tier VII: Kaidai Type II, very heavy deck gun and torp armament, as the IJN Subs start to transfer into being oversized Tier VIII: J1; the IJN would never look back from basically building undersea cruisers Tier IX: I-400; oversized? Yes. TX material? Maybe. Should it be a Tier 9 though? Yep Tier X: I-201, although not STRICTLY a Type XXI it was basically developed on a parallel course and might as well just be a Type XXI; a speed demon in her own right, this is a *solid* TX boat, even compared to post war entries. French Tier III: Tier IV: Tier V: Tier VI: Tier VII: Tier VIII: Tier IX: Tier X:
  3. World of Warships: Subs Terror of the Deep: Hard difficulty Yesterday, Terror of the Deep, submarine mission came out on hard difficulty. I must say that I am well pleased with the changes WarGaming made. Mostly with the changes in how much damage is inflicted to a sub, by torpedoes, destroyers, battleships, and cruisers. Lest I forget to mention, the depth charge that deals 4500 hp damage to subs. And one good salvo from a battleship deals around 8k if direct hit. Subs catch fire easy to secondary ship guns. Oh and those destroyers will set you a blaze quickly, plus deal a good amount of damage with main guns. This round of Terror of the Deep will pit you against destroyers and cruisers. And this time you have to kill them. Destroyers being the hardest to kill, because they can move quickly side to side. You must have good timing and get in as close as you can to kill the destroyer. If you get hit directly by a ship with HE, you are going to catch fire, and if torpedoes hit your sub don't expect to live long. The damage inflicted by ships to subs is good. I would say damage that subs inflict on enemy ships is fair as well. It takes 1 torpedo to kill a destroyer, and depending on the health pool of the BB or CA, you would need multiple torpedoes. But you can only shoot 1 torpedo at a time. The key to playing a sub in this game is to manage, your air intake. Yes, WG limited the air supply, but I think this is a great idea, especially if subs every came to Random. Subs in the game are like “glass cannons”, they take damage really easy. All in all, I would say that the damage Sub verses Ship, is well balanced. The key to staying alive in this Sub game, is to mange your air supply, and always keep your speed up. Be ready to dive to avoid getting hit by torpedoes, secondaries, and main gun salvos. When you slow down, it takes longer to surface for air, which will kill your air supply quickly. If your sub surfaces at the wrong time, then you will end up dead next to an enemy. The game mechanics for HP damage to subs was noticeably higher, from the easy mode. So avoid shells, torpedoes, and mines, then you will survive to win. But in order to win you must make sure to spot the land gun mounts, and spot the Tower as fast as you can. Then go to town killing dd’s and cruisers. Then kill Rasputin. This is an enjoyable operation to play. It is been a great way to see how subs would interact verses other ships. I really hope that one day subs come to Random games. I know its while off, but maybe we could see subs in Space Ships 2019? It would be a great way to have a round 2 of sub game play, but only allow 1 sub per team. It would be awesome to see how subs would play not only against ships, but verses other subs. Maybe even verses CV’s? Subs worked great in operation, it just needs to be tested “Player vs Player”. Love the subs hope to see them again in the game.
  4. So I was taking out the Barracuda, rotating the subs per match for maximium fun, when I stumbled upon a strat. The Barracuda's secondaries open up and/or continue firing while the sub is surfacing or diving. mashing the F and C keys appropriately to get the depth indicator hovering basically exactly halway between surfaced and periscope depth gives me the surface detectability of a submerged sub while having a 6km secondary range, alowing me to farm damage and torp with impunity. I've posted this image elsewhere but I'll include it because I think the stats speak for themselves, its a very nifty strategy (or exploit, you choose). Mayhaps we'll see the rise of the arty!divison of Barracudas?
  5. When I first heard that the WG devs, announced the arrival of submarines, I immediately remembered the countless threads, memes, and the famous video denying the inclusion of submarines into the game. The countless arguments against submarines, why'd they would be terrible in fleet battles, why they would only be good against un-armed freighters and such. I then became truly furious when I realized the whole premise of the submarines: stealthy torpedo launching platforms. ONCE AGAIN, the developers have created a line of vessels whose main damage is tailored towards a specialization with torpedoes, again leaving IJN torpedo boat DDs to rot in the ditch, AGAIN! If the developers really wanted to create a line of ships whose specialty was stealthy torpedo delivery, why did they AGAIN go to the trouble of creating an entire group of ships, this time even creating a new layer to the game to accommodate said ships, when they could have simply tweaked a few numbers on the IJN DDs and their torpedoes?! WG, either you need to share the drugs that made you think this whole venture was good idea, or simply come out with the truth, here and now, and say whether or not you hate IJN DDs.
  6. Ok! Thanks to the update in the PT test, I'm happy to finally get my hands on all the subs and gave each of them a run. Here's my thoughts; General Remarks: Rudder shift- The rudder is odd for many of these subs- I find I'm often over-compensating and have to swing back to point my sub in the right direction, doing sea-saw actions as I try to aim my torps. It'll take some getting used to but it is a bit uncomfortable. High splashes- Near misses from the surface guns create huge plumes of water which obstruct vision when trying to drop torpedoes- it's very difficult to aim in situations where you're targeted by every gun but willingly being on the surface (say in the Barracuda, but dropping your forward torps). Torp Direction: With surfacing or switching weapons sometimes it's a little hard to get the torpedoes to swing to where I need them. Dropping torps out of a sub is a bit different than how surface ships play, so a new indicator may be needed to make it easier for subs to drop their torps on such a narrow arc profile. Rudder fragility: Each of the captains are loaded up with full skill points for you to configure- all of them have 'Last stand'. I've noticed my rudders incapacitated kind of frequently, enough that it must be really frustrating to take that hit when you've already used your repair team to deal with fires. Subs are going to live and die by how well they maneuver, don't make rudders this fragile! Dive/Surface consistency: I figure it's a factor of balance, but I'm not sure if it's working. Subs are already going to have the diversity of weapons/rudder shift / speed that a player is going to content with, but the time taken to dive feels like one of those things that should be standardized to make it easier on players. The Zipper is ridiculous for how easily it does this, and part of why the Barracuda doesn't work as well is because it takes so long to dive. Moreover, the activation of secondaries and what arc you get for dropping torps isn't always consistent with when you reach the depth. The Barracuda can start firing before the sub is even fully surfaced and getting air. Anti-submarine forces: Enemy cruisers and destroyers dump torpedoes, but I don't think I've been hit by one yet. These torps are surface-only, and most of the time when I'm mixing it up with enemy ships, I'm at periscope depth ideally. If I'm on the surface, there's a lot more things threatening me than those torps (every secondary, every primary, and those dang catapults). Depth charges themselves have been kind of a nuissance, doing more to passively chip away health than be a serious threat to the sub. Craft Review: Barracuda (X1 Submarine) – Cruiser Submarine, has two secondaries. Starter submarine, has a one-system 4-tube torpedo launcher standard torpedoes and a 2-tube freeze torpedo. Submergence time is nearly two minutes! Dive/surface time is the slowest of the submarines. My guess is she’s supposed to be played like a kind of destroyer. Stay submerged, approach with torpedo attacks, then surface and let your secondaries open fire. Problem is Barracuda doesn’t have the resilience to last in a gun fight, so when you’re at the range her secondaries are effective, you’re getting more secondaries thrown back at you in turn. In a PvP environment this might actually work, since she can ambush lone ships or sneak in when a friend is engaging the target. Alone in this bizzare land where catapults throw things at you, helping not-battleships laden with secondaries, it's kind of a death trap. Still, I can see myself trying to run this in PvP and being clever with it... I'd try it at least in random battles, doing as I described (lone ambusher). Maybe she can spot BBs, but she's going to have problems if she's caught unaware. Edits: I think if her dive time was better or her detection radius were smaller she'd be a successful raider. She catches fire disturbingly easy, so if you surface thinking you can run and gun, be prepared to pop your repair team immediately as the Zikasas catch your ship on fire from glancing blows. Zipper Sub (M-401) – Almost comically fast surface/dive speeds. Air time is reduced accordingly to 50 seconds. Only armed with a couple of freeze torpedoes (likely as an experiment for one tube per weapon), and a forward gun. Has a pretty small detection radius compared to her attack range. I don’t think the quick dive time is worth it. At the moment there’s nothing you get out of it- changing depth quickly allows you to duck under stuff and avoid torps quickly… maybe changing depth to escape depth charges? But if a more effective anti-submarine countermeasure was used (ie, depth charges detonate at level 3, level 2 and 1 (surfaced) you can be rammed), then this wouldn’t be needed. Not sure if I'd like this sub in a PvP environment. If the speed was up with her dive time it could work... something needs to be rewarding for the 50 seconds you have underwater. Either her torps need to reload faster or something. Right now her only advantage is staying clear from depth charges and being up on the surface for as little time as possible (for the shortest underwater time of the subs now). Edit: If you ever hear complaining about submarines popping up and down out of the water to fire their guns with impunity, it's likely they're driving a Zipper. I don't know how successful this tactic is really- the single gun doesn't have the high fire chance the Barracuda's twin guns do, and it's also likely to miss. They can be interesting in swarm tactics where three of them are taking turns poping up and back into the water to snap off their guns but... they're fragile. I'd almost say their rudder shift and speed is more desirable than the pop-ups. Of the subs we're offered, if you want an example of what a Cartoon submarine looks like, it's the Zipper Sub. Interestingly, it's supposed to be based on a Russian submarine. Seelowe (Type XXI)– Torpedoes are paired with 3 launch systems- 2 normal, 1 freeze, all of them out the front for a total of 4 standard torps. Probably an experiment to try splitting all those front torps and making the player think about it. No secondary weapons. Has a pair of AA cannons that are unused. Dive/surface time is sufficient. Apart from the rudder slippage issues this is one of the most satisfying submarines to play, without the arsenal on the Killer Whale that makes you feel guilty for being so over-armed. Air time about 1:20. In PvP this would probably be one of the best submarines to use- almost to the point I wonder of being unbalanced. It was easy to torp the zombie battleships when they were sailing in a row, and such would be the case in Pvp for inattentive battleship players. That all said, I tried taking on one of the zombie destroyers and got my butt handed to me as it easily dodged my torps and killed me with gunfire and catapult attacks. Gerfalcon (Type XXVI) – Torpedoes similar to the Barracuda- individual systems with reloads. Strange setup of one 5-tube freeze torpedo out the front with standard tubes in the rear at an off-angle from the propeller. Dive time is satisfactory, Does not suffer from the rudder slippage issues, was great on steering. It seems like the Gerfalcon is designed for the dive-and-pop-up attack. Disable a target with the freeze torps, dive beneath them, and then use the rear torps as finishers. In my opinion, it’s just not fast enough to do this- it’s almost better to approach then turn around and fire your rear torps for the additional damage. If she had some normal torps in the front she could be interesting to try in PvP, but I don't think she's fast enough to do the trick. Still, the splayed rear torpedoes is an interesting way to handle this on subs, and the split means drivers have to be mindful on which torpedo goes in what direction. Edit: These B.U.T.T. torpedoes (for any Star Control fans out there) are interesting to use, since you can use them in a retreat pattern to maintain some distance from your opponent. You'll need to turn around in order to use them, which is kind of slow (fortunately the Gerfalcon is one of the fastest turning subs), and makes you do a circle while you're trying to get all your torps on target. In terms of practicality I like the handling and speed of the Gerfalcon a lot more than the armament arrangement, which is kinda comical. Edit 2: Gerfalcon is 31 knots max. Killer whale (Gato-class)– Unlocked when you get 5-stars on the Terror of the deep mission. Kinda reminds me of the penguin’s submarine from the 1966 Batman movie (Please please WG can this be a premium? Or a skin we can win for april fools?). It has a 1-2-1-2 arrangement between standard torps and freezing torps, front and back. Detection radius is similar to the Barracuda’s, so be careful when surfacing. Probably the most satisfying submarine to play, tied with the Seelowe, because of the armament and arrangements. Rudder shift suffers the slippage problem and the sub is a little sluggish to turn, but the option of front-back torpedoes is very helpful. Unlike the Gerfalcon, I was able to execute the dive-and-pop-up attack with the Killer Whale. The secondary cannon was also great to have on hand- I got sunk in my first game with the KW when I tried using it to finish off a nearly dead cruiser. This is probably what a future PvP submarine is going to look like. I think the torp armament would be tweaked, but the optional secondary (and optional AA) combined with flexibility on a torpedo armament is what many mid-to-high tier subs will perform with. Closing thoughts There's enough between all of this that I think subs can work. The best ships to represent submarine play are going to be the Seelowe and the Killer Whale, with an honorable mention to the Barracuda. The other two are just too strange to consider realistic. If I were to guess, early/middle/late subs for a few trees would be Barracuda (one-off weirdness like submarines with functional secondaries), Seelowe (Basically torps only, good performance) and Killer WHale (every torp you'd want in every forward/backward direction with a functioning secondary thrown on). Edit: I'll keep revisiting this document as I keep playing these to get a better opinion on them, and what they could mean for future PvP play. I'll add this too though, they aren't invincible. Quite a few of these missions were failed against simple bot players.
  7. I saw Flamu's sub video and installed the PTS client to test them out for myself (this took a LONG time, like, hours). You have to beat the Halloween 2016 escort mission one first and then it's supposed to unlock the other. Got 5 stars with it and, oh, right, the sub one is not the "of the week" one so it requires a division to play it. [edited]. Lame.
  8. I'm one of those guys whose really stoked for Submarines. But as I think about it, they're going to have deficiencies that WG will have to handwave away in order to make them work successfully. Based on the gameplay snippets that we see, I have some concerns if the class will underperform, rather than be these invisible all-killing monsters that never allow anyone to be safe again. Because I assure you, they won't. The Primary Armament is restrictive Based on what we've seen in the Halloween gameplay video, you're dropping at most 3 torpedoes before the whole salvo needs to reload. You have a very narrow firing arc, and ZERO secondary weapons. I don't think they're going to give us deck guns guys, or maybe even AA guns (though we do see those at least, so perhaps?) When I run my IJN DDs, (Specifically Minekaze) I rely on my torp armament first, but I like the reassurances I have with my gun batteries. They aren't the greatest, but I can at least snipe at enemy DDs, or hit near-death BBs when I know my Torpedoes would take too long to get there. A battery of deck guns can be a nice finisher and comfort weapon in case your torpedoes miss, aren't fast enough, or your against a more nimble enemy that can dodge the torpedoes. Submarines do not have this option. Their entire gameplay wins or fails based on if they can get their Torpedoes to hit a target. Expect many frustrating misses you can't do anything about because that Battleship decided to veer juuuust slightly to the left. That's, what, an entire minute of reload time spent? You may not have enough Air Time to stay under as long as you'd like. The mechanic makes sense to me, preventing Submarines from, say, staying underwater for most of the game's duration and being the invisible killers players are terrified!! of facing. I see it as much of a fallback mechanic as smoke is for DD players- they need it if they get in trouble and want to sneak around someone. But all it takes is one determined DD player to just... hang out... above the water, circling at full speed, waiting for the DD to run out of air. Even without any countermeasures an enemy DD is fast enough to avoid torps, can quick-fire their own Torps in response, and typically has the fast-cycling guns that will make short work of a surfaced sub. The only way I see Subs escaping this is to stay hidden and trying to duck behind an island to put some cover between them and the hunter to surface and get some air. That seems like really restrictive gameplay to me and being very much in favor of the surface ships with quicker guns. If you surface wrong and end up facing something like four boats of the enemy's team, you're going to be an even bigger fire magnet than any destroyer that accidently dips below their concealment range. And if you're slow with no air, it's going to end for you very quickly. Incidental Rams will kill you If you're not paying attention in a Submarine, or you try getting underneath your opponent to speed away (at your probaly slow knots), if you're not paying attention the enemy BB will ram you, you will die, and not take away a good portion of their health as-is with nearly every other class collision. You're banking a lot on your stealth and ability to drop torpedoes hidden because, literally, that's all you have. You're trading away everything else that's great about being a boat for that one ability, and you may find it wanting. Good news is all of these issues are without trying the halloween event, which I'm eager to be a part of next month. But I really don't think submarines are the doom-and-gloom the naysayers are portraying. When released, they'll be a hyper-specialized slot catering to sneaky, crafty players who like positioning for that right torp drop and getting away from your opponent- like every IJN player hugging islands are now. And of these expectations, WG doesn't have to go to this bottom limit either; they can have deck guns, their torp reloads might be faster, they may stay hidden for longer, etx. They're not going to be the apocalypse for WoWs, that honor is probably going to carrier's squadron planes, which can kite and harass you to death then just come back for more with their unlimited planes (If you thought carriers were bad before...) No, at worst, sub drivers are probably going to find the class frustrating and inefficient to play without WG making essential tweaks. If we read about them, we'd say they're unbalanced, but if we were there on the testing side and watching them struggle to make these things >work< well, you'd understand. Or not, since it's easy to complain on the internet without having any practical knowledge of what you're discussing. Like this very post you finished reading.
  9. I'm going to put this plainly as possible - if submarines are introduced to the game, will you keep playing or not? ------------------ Personally I will leave the game. In the past I've made my position on this quite strongly. Introducing submarines is a bad idea all around. Thoughts? Vote and let your opinion be known.
  10. I'm one of those guys whose really stoked for Submarines. But as I think about it, they're going to have deficiencies that WG will have to handwave away in order to make them work successfully. Based on the gameplay snippets that we see, I have some concerns if the class will underperform, rather than be these invisible all-killing monsters that never allow anyone to be safe again. Because I assure you, they won't. The Primary Armament is restrictive Based on what we've seen in the Halloween gameplay video, you're dropping at most 3 torpedoes before the whole salvo needs to reload. You have a very narrow firing arc, and ZERO secondary weapons. I don't think they're going to give us deck guns guys, or maybe even AA guns (though we do see those at least, so perhaps?) When I run my IJN DDs, (Specifically Minekaze) I rely on my torp armament first, but I like the reassurances I have with my gun batteries. They aren't the greatest, but I can at least snipe at enemy DDs, or hit near-death BBs when I know my Torpedoes would take too long to get there. A battery of deck guns can be a nice finisher and comfort weapon in case your torpedoes miss, aren't fast enough, or your against a more nimble enemy that can dodge the torpedoes. Submarines do not have this option. Their entire gameplay wins or fails based on if they can get their Torpedoes to hit a target. Expect many frustrating misses you can't do anything about because that Battleship decided to veer juuuust slightly to the left. That's, what, an entire minute of reload time spent? You may not have enough Air Time to stay under as long as you'd like. The mechanic makes sense to me, preventing Submarines from, say, staying underwater for most of the game's duration and being the invisible killers players are terrified!! of facing. I see it as much of a fallback mechanic as smoke is for DD players- they need it if they get in trouble and want to sneak around someone. But all it takes is one determined DD player to just... hang out... above the water, circling at full speed, waiting for the DD to run out of air. Even without any countermeasures an enemy DD is fast enough to avoid torps, can quick-fire their own Torps in response, and typically has the fast-cycling guns that will make short work of a surfaced sub. The only way I see Subs escaping this is to stay hidden and trying to duck behind an island to put some cover between them and the hunter to surface and get some air. That seems like really restrictive gameplay to me and being very much in favor of the surface ships with quicker guns. If you surface wrong and end up facing something like four boats of the enemy's team, you're going to be an even bigger fire magnet than any destroyer that accidently dips below their concealment range. And if you're slow with no air, it's going to end for you very quickly. Incidental Rams will kill you If you're not paying attention in a Submarine, or you try getting underneath your opponent to speed away (at your probaly slow knots), if you're not paying attention the enemy BB will ram you, you will die, and not take away a good portion of their health as-is with nearly every other class collision. You're banking a lot on your stealth and ability to drop torpedoes hidden because, literally, that's all you have. You're trading away everything else that's great about being a boat for that one ability, and you may find it wanting. Good news is all of these issues are without trying the halloween event, which I'm eager to be a part of next month. But I really don't think submarines are the doom-and-gloom the naysayers are portraying. When released, they'll be a hyper-specialized slot catering to sneaky, crafty players who like positioning for that right torp drop and getting away from your opponent- like every IJN player hugging islands are now. And of these expectations, WG doesn't have to go to this bottom limit either; they can have deck guns, their torp reloads might be faster, they may stay hidden for longer, etx. They're not going to be the apocalypse for WoWs, that honor is probably going to carrier's squadron planes, which can kite and harass you to death then just come back for more with their unlimited planes (If you thought carriers were bad before...) No, at worst, sub drivers are probably going to find the class frustrating and inefficient to play without WG making essential tweaks. If we read about them, we'd say they're unbalanced, but if we were there on the testing side and watching them struggle to make these things >work< well, you'd understand. Or not, since it's easy to complain on the internet without having any practical knowledge of what you're discussing. Like this very post you finished reading.
  11. AdmiralQ

    Subs...WOWS Rubicon

    Those who have played WOT may remember the Rubicon patch and how poorly that was received for what it was going to try to do. Thankfully WG scrapped it before it got too far. That is what Subs is. I know some of you wanted subs but many of us knew it would be a bad thing to do. Hell in both WOWS and WOT player complain about invisifire or attacked when you can't counter. a sub is the height of that since their whole purpose is to attack and leave unseen. Not to mention they are overall too slow and given what we have seen of the event can't be under for too long so can't escape after a hopefully good run. and again breaks the meta of the game. Also if they in their eyes couldn't get CVs right why in the world should we trust them with Subs? And that leads to the big point. WG..... YOU LIED TO US Since the beginning you have stated repeatedly that you would never bring subs in this game for multiple reasons. Now you are and from the sounds of it were always working in the background to make them a thing while saying to our faces you wouldn't. so why should I give you my money, why should I even trust you when you have been clearly lying to me. How much money did you waste on this idea rather then fix actual issues and that lack of lines is bull, you are about to launch the RN DD, you still have the itallian navy the russian BBs. yes at some point you will run out sicne you are in one period. Ocne that happens launch a new game with more freedom and jsut keep enough staff to maintain WOWS At minimum half your player base deosn't want this. FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE LISTEN TO THE PLAYERS
  12. People are going nuts about the Halloween addition of submarines. Maybe we are reading into it too much, maybe not. I think it is definitely a test bed. Sasha (WG NA) in an interview with gamesbeat said that player feedback will be very important and they are running out of content. I still think there are huge development hurdles including submarines, and there use in warfare is not really conducive to warships. Slow, vulnerable and limited. Every map would need an underwater rework and we don't even have the carrier rework yet. Do you even want submarines in game?
  13. tm63au

    Battle For Control Of The Seas

    Hi Wow things are really hotting up on the forum with posts and threads left right and centre . Things have really been happening since the announcement and video showing the new addition to the game has people divided, on one side we have the Anti sub lobby CAS ( Coalition Against Submarines ) preaching fire and brimstone and there saying its the end of the world as we Know it. Then there is the pro sub lobby UFFU ( United Front For Unterseeboots ) rejoicing about this new era. The salt is flying, accusations of betrayal and more , the heat is rising, sounds like a normal everyday Caucus meeting of The Australian labour party . Myself I am one of number of moderates who is urging patience and waiting and seeing how things will turn out. To this I say chill relax play a game, have a drink or watch your favourite movie , but don't let this degenerate into open warfare. However if this is not possible well all i can say is lets hope the casualties are low from the blood letting. And here is few pictures to fire up the spirits for both sides l God help the next few weeks regards
  14. Submarines in WOWS--It is an interesting concept. A few points to consider: 1. NEW Game engine--Macwrapper from Code Weavers will have to do a new wrapper for subs. They already are probably working on one for the new CV play. I wonder if the WOWs Halloween game will even play in October 2018 ? 2. Subs of WW2 vintage did around 25 knots on the surface. WW1 did 18 knots on the surface. Speed will drop to 8 knots or so submerged (this may not be an issue with the Oxygen meter). Depending on how long you are underwater, a sub may have to fire quickly before surfacing. There will be no Irwin Allen Seaviews or 1990s vintage SeaQuest DSV subs in the game doing 30 or more knots underwater. The vessels will be SLOW 3. DDs are getting overtaxed as the main sub hunter. CAs had provisions for subs. You can see the equipment on the Tier 3 Aurora. So does (yes) the Tier 1 sloops. Note that they have depth charge deployment devices on them. While any of these ships have a role in sub chasing ? 4. CV aircraft did a fair amount of sub chasing (as well as the Zeppelins of WW2 US Navy). What role would they have ? 5. While the German U-Boats fired fore and aft torpedoes, the American "O" and "S" classes, if memory serves correct, fired only from the BOW in WW1 and later. I will give WOWS credit for thinking of all the Gamers who have asked for submarines. It will be the hardest ship class to put in if they proceed. It would be a programmer's nightmare given all the changes needed to get submarines to work right. Astrosaint
  15. There seems to be some confusion on what subs can and can't do as seen from the demo video. I'd like to share some of my observations in an attempt to help everyone have a better understanding of what we know as of now. Please add you general comments on subs to other threads as this one is about what we know about how they will work in game. If you want to share your thoughts on these specific sub mechanics feel free. I just don't want to debate whether subs will be good for the game in this discussion. Thank you. My observations in no particular order. -Subs have three depths thay can operate at. Surfaced, with an detection range of ~5km or so. Periscope depth, detection range of ~4.5km Fully submerged, no normal detection range (invisible to surface ships outside of assured detection range). -Subs only have one or two forward firing torps, and one rear firing torp, all with a fairly narrow firing arc (no main guns, no AA). -Subs can only fire their torps surfaced and at periscope depths. They can not fire fully submerged. Subs on the surface have an RNG element to where there torps will go when fired aking them hard to hit targets. Torps fired at periscope depth don't seem to have this RGN element. Torp alpha ~10,000-17,000. -Subs have a health pool ranging from 6,400-11,700 HP. -Sub consumables, damage control and hydro. -Subs have top speed of ~17 kts. (and they have the same top speed submerged as on the surface). -Subs can dive to depths of 100-150 meters. -Subs can stay submerged for approximately 1:20. It seems to take the same amount of time to fully recharge your oxygen levels while surfaced (1:20). Once subs run out of oxygen while submerged they will automatically surface. -There will be depth charges to attack subs, fired from DDs. Depth charges will detonate at random depths, and can cause direct damage, splash damage, and fires. Fire and flooding will act the same for subs on the surface and submerged. -Subs will only be in the Halloween event as a test to determine possible inclusion in the game if player feedback is positive. At this point WG hasn't decided to include subs into the game. The Halloween event is test only. If player feedback is positive WG will likely look into farther development. Okay, that's what I have for now. I may have missed or forgotten some things. Feels free to add anything I've missed or gotten wrong.
  16. Since the beginning you sworn to never bring in subs. Well with today's annoucement you have made that a lie. YOU ARE NOW LIARS You lied to us. If you couldn't make CVS work where in hell do you think you can make subs work with the game. This is a stupid idiot move and it is going to hurt you more then the CV rework will do.
  17. No wait, seriously its true. If you take a close look at the Indianapolis there appears to be a mini sub strapped onto the spotter plane hanger deck. Im on my phone so i dont have a screen shot, but its there. So subs are now in the game!
  18. RipNuN2

    Subs confirmed?

    New Bad Advice video seems to confirms subs are coming . . .
×