rafael_azuaje

Why?? Wows cruiser tier 2 &3 not torps

  • You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

36 posts in this topic

Oleg need add your his 2 tubes launch torps make the ship better, WHY wows NOT add torps for oleg,mikasa ,emden,aurora ????WHY please.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wows don't include submerged launchers...same story with Warspite and many other battleships and cruisers...

Even IRL they are pretty useless anyway...

In other cases it's because of balance issues, to make the gameplay more fair for all ship classes and nations...

Oleg is a very very performant tier 3 cruiser and does not need such an addition to her arsenal to do well...

Edited by The_first_harbinger

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On this subject, Kolberg is also missing a couple deck-mounted torpedoes.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I heard from the dev team there were no plans for fixed submerged torpedo tubes.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On this subject, Kolberg is also missing a couple deck-mounted torpedoes.

 

Yeah I felt that Kolberg does deserve those...in the current state her armament is pretty outmatched by other tier 3s...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warspite has configuración 30s he had tubes torps but it is remove in the 20s. Oleg,mikasa,emden,aurora IF had your his torps , it is remove realism :(

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were fairly useless in real life....There's a reason they stopped putting underwater torpedo tubes on most ships. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant destroy a BB as SC wirh aurora. But with torps help much.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because my Kurfurst got torped by a friendly Ibuki this morning. 

 

Err, okay? Fail to see what that has to do with the OP though...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warspite has configuración 30s he had tubes torps but it is remove in the 20s. Oleg,mikasa,emden,aurora IF had your his torps , it is remove realism :(

 

The game engine doesn't allow for submerged weapons fire. All weapons fire is at the surface of the water and above. This is why all ships with submerged launchers do not have them in the game. Add to that the matter of game balance, and putting submerged launchers on ships just isn't a good idea, not to mention that in actual combat, most submerged launchers on ships didn't perform well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The game engine doesn't allow for submerged weapons fire. All weapons fire is at the surface of the water and above. This is why all ships with submerged launchers do not have them in the game. Add to that the matter of game balance, and putting submerged launchers on ships just isn't a good idea, not to mention that in actual combat, most submerged launchers on ships didn't perform well.

 

WG did experiment with submerged launchers during the 2016 bathtub event... I heard that they are not pleased with the result...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

WG did experiment with submerged launchers during the 2016 bathtub event... I heard that they are not pleased with the result...

 

They couldn't get it to work right, due to the game engine. And even when they did actually work, they didn't actually do anything. For submerged weapons fire, the devs would have to completely rebuild the game engine, and they aren't going to do that for something that isn't going to really add anything to the game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I felt that Kolberg does deserve those...in the current state her armament is pretty outmatched by other tier 3s..

 

Yup, and with only one tube per side, it isn't as if their addition would be much of a game changer.

 

There are also a number of secondaries on low tier German cruisers that are modeled but nonfunctional, though I think they're below the minimum caliber (75mm?) that WG currently acknowledges.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They couldn't get it to work right, due to the game engine. And even when they did actually work, they didn't actually do anything.

 

I would like to know your definition of both "not working right" and "didn't do anything" considering they were successfully launching torpedoes which behaved exactly how any other torpedoes behave in-game. Not once did I witness a torpedo colliding with the ship which launched it, nor did I hear of anyone having issues with failure to launch. I will grant you that their implementation was a kludge, but considering you couldn't tell without using the debug camera, one custom (non-deck launcher style) model would tidy up that loose end.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emden has guns secondaries but not work,mikasa has more guns secondaries of less cariber but not work same oleg why? Aré guns of 50mm


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emden has guns secondaries but not work,mikasa has more guns secondaries of less cariber but not work same oleg why? Aré guns of 50mm

 

Mikasa is not a cruiser like emden and Oleg.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They couldn't get it to work right, due to the game engine. And even when they did actually work, they didn't actually do anything. For submerged weapons fire, the devs would have to completely rebuild the game engine, and they aren't going to do that for something that isn't going to really add anything to the game.

 

Or they lower the game floor and all the ships are technically "flying" in the game, which they would have to do for subs, but that would lead way to a whole slew of issues in itself.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so a few things. 

 

One, fixed underwater torpedo tubes are basically useless, otherwise the various navies would have kept them on their ships instead of removing literally all of them. I believe there was only one instance ever of a battleship using them, and they were all removed from cruisers because they weren't aimable without maneuvering the ship. 

 

Two, Aurora isn't meant to be able to solo kill a South Carolina, that isn't it's job. 

 

Three, the small secondaries aren't used because they would do literally nothing. They weren't meant for defending against ships as big as destroyers, just against small, unarmored torpedo boats.

 

Four, according to Wikipedia, the Kolberg's torpedo tubes were fixed, and therefore have a similar level of usefulness to the underwater ones. Furutaka also had fixed torpedo tubes in her introductory form, but they were quickly removed for traversing launchers.

Edited by SergeantHop

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or they lower the game floor and all the ships are technically "flying" in the game, which they would have to do for subs, but that would lead way to a whole slew of issues in itself.

 

That's already how it works (that's how they ran the space ship event as a previous April Fool's event), and torpedoes already run under the surface. If anything it would be easier to implement torpedoes which don't have to move on the Z-axis like the above-surface launched ones do.

 

In a match or replay, you can press RCtrl+RShift+Backspace to enable the debug camera. Use the arrow keys to move and the numberpad 7 & 1 keys on the number pad to increase/decrease altitude. Use this to view a torpedo launch from at or beneath the water's surface.

Edited by Special_Kay

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or they lower the game floor and all the ships are technically "flying" in the game, which they would have to do for subs, but that would lead way to a whole slew of issues in itself.

The thing is, there isn't any altitude function in this game, so planes would be at the same level as ships unless the engine was reworked.  Either way, the game engine is severely limiting what is currently possible.

Edited by TenguBlade

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's already how it works (that's how they ran the space ship event as a previous April Fool's event), and torpedoes already run under the surface. If anything it would be easier to implement torpedoes which don't have to move on the Z-axis like the above-surface launched ones do.

 

In a match or replay, you can press RCtrl+RShift+Backspace to enable the debug camera. Use the arrow keys to move and the numberpad 7 & 1 keys on the number pad to increase/decrease altitude. Use this to view a torpedo launch from at or beneath the water's surface.

 

If that is the case, than the claim to rebuilding the game engine is invalid because said solution to the problem already exists.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, there isn't any altitude function in this game, so planes would be at the same level as ships unless the engine was reworked.  Either way, the game engine is severely limiting what is currently possible.

 

I'm not sure what you definition of altitude function is, but the engine certainly uses the Z-axis in both its collision physics and its animations. I will grant you that altitude is purely cosmetic for aircraft, but this is because aircraft do not utilize collision physics (released ordnance notwithstanding), so to blame that simplification on the engine's alleged difficulty with the Z-axis is incorrect.

 

 

If that is the case, than the claim to rebuilding the game engine is invalid because said solution to the problem already exists.

 

Precisely. If they have indeed stated that they were unhappy with the results of the bathtub boats' submerged forward torpedo tube experiment, I would wager that they were unhappy with how the players interacted with it rather than with the flawless technical execution. As an aside, the real reason submarines pose a technical problem can be seen by viewing the maps beneath the surface via debug camera—the ocean floors have not been fully modelled. Any map hosting submarines would need to be refit to correct this omission of convenience. (This is the same reason we cannot walk through ships in port, as they have no internal textures and minimal internal modelling, and I suspect this is the same reason we cannot have a free camera in port—it's likely that most port structures are only partly modelled and textured as well.)

Edited by Special_Kay

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure what you definition of altitude function is, but the engine certainly uses the Z-axis in both its collision physics and its animations. I will grant you that altitude is purely cosmetic for aircraft, but this is because aircraft do not utilize collision physics (released ordnance notwithstanding), so to blame that simplification on the engine's alleged difficulty with the Z-axis is incorrect.

 

 

 

Precisely. If they have indeed stated that they were unhappy with the results of the bathtub boats' submerged forward torpedo tube experiment, I would wager that they were unhappy with how the players interacted with it rather than with the flawless technical execution. As an aside, the real reason submarines pose a technical problem can be seen by viewing the maps beneath the surface via debug camera—the ocean floors have not been fully modelled. Any map hosting submarines would need to be refit to correct this omission of convenience. (This is the same reason we cannot walk through ships in port, as they have no internal textures and minimal internal modelling, and I suspect this is the same reason we cannot have a free camera in port—it's likely that most port structures are only partly modelled and textured as well.)

 

Or the space is so limited that it can't move around.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.