Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

Deep Water Torpedoes?

74 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,217
[RKLES]
Members
7,083 posts
8,720 battles

Heard Deep Water Torpedoes will only hit Battleships and Cruisers?

Not sure this is a good idea since the DD population could spiral out of control since why not use ships that are immune to new torpedoes? Not to mention seal clubbing Division will be able to use the new DDs to create solid Torp waves since they will be able to launch torps without any danger of hitting each other.

Been seeing the new DDs being tested and just feel that they should use regular Torpedoes. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,038
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,651 posts
9,960 battles

Not being able to torpedo red destroyers, especially in smoke is too much of a downside to offset the advantages of the deep running torpedo.

I don't see myself taking them if I have a choice.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

Lotta long threads on this before the GZ/ichase fiasco.

Majority I saw (with current info) was many DDs won't use them.

Edited by Wulfgarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
1 minute ago, issm said:

The main useful application for these that I can use is to replace the normal torps on CVs, so that they can't roflstomp DDs so hard.

I thought your main point of contention was that CVs would just park an empty strike squad over you and let their team kill you, now it's outright destruction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,559
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,542 posts
13,992 battles
22 minutes ago, mofton said:

Not being able to torpedo red destroyers, especially in smoke is too much of a downside to offset the advantages of the deep running torpedo.

I don't see myself taking them if I have a choice.

 

This is a huge negative aspect that reigns in the power of the DW torps.

 

Unless you're a range spamming RU DD, other DDs depend on torps to settle matters with each other.  Using guns only highlights you for everyone to shoot at you, that is why torps are the weapon of choice in DD vs DD fighting.  Not being able to do that against another DD is a major detractor and severely limits a possible Ace card against them.  That alone is something important to reign in on these Pan-Asian DDs and DW torps.

 

What will be more vital are your DDs and CVs spotting such dangers.  If something like those high tier Pan-Asian DDs with their high tier USN DD torps with DW settings can get loose, they can cause tremendous problems to Cruisers and Battleships.  The short detection range on these things are a huge bonus.  Cruisers in particular will be the worst off.  They don't have the HP, TDS that Battleships do to take torpedo damage and it will be catastrophic for any Cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
10 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

I thought your main point of contention was that CVs would just park an empty strike squad over you and let their team kill you, now it's outright destruction?

 

CVs can do both.

 

It's not actually that hard to manual drop a DD and 1 shot it, trick is to nail them against an obstacle so they can only turn one way, or to catch them as they're trying to slow down into smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
897
[LEGIO]
Members
2,955 posts
5,370 battles
Just now, issm said:

 

CVs can do both.

 

It's not actually that hard to manual drop a DD and 1 shot it, trick is to nail them against an obstacle so they can only turn one way, or to catch them as they're trying to slow down into smoke.

 

So a smart CV driver shouldn't be able to do this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
Just now, issm said:

 

CVs can do both.

 

It's not actually that hard to manual drop a DD and 1 shot it, trick is to nail them against an obstacle so they can only turn one way, or to catch them as they're trying to slow down into smoke.

There is that, but deep water torpedoes wouldn't change much as most CV players that I see often reserve their torpedo squads for BBs anyway, relegating DD hunting duties to the dive bombers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles

OK, so deep water torps can only hit BB's and Cruisers, and presumably CV's as well.  But what's the advantage of using DW torps?  Are they stealthier than regular torps?  Do they hit harder?  What's their upside?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
1 minute ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

 

So a smart CV driver shouldn't be able to do this?

Every time I see complaints regarding the power of CVs in superbly competent players (read: not me), I always wonder, do they not have the right to have that strength? If BBs are allowed to blast other BBs and cruisers away with well placed salvos, if cruisers are allowed to burn BBs to the water line, and if destroyers are allowed to delete careless players, then shouldn't CVs be allowed to delete targets if they go through the effort of properly setting up their planes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

OK, so deep water torps can only hit BB's and Cruisers, and presumably CV's as well.  But what's the advantage of using DW torps?  Are they stealthier than regular torps?  Do they hit harder?  What's their upside?

They were supposed to be stealthier. Once I realized that, I wondered why WG wouldn't just un-nerf the IJN torpedoes at that point, instead of writing code for a whole new set of torpedoes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
6 minutes ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

So a smart CV driver shouldn't be able to do this?

 

Considering how many other abilities they have - no.

 

3 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

Every time I see complaints regarding the power of CVs in superbly competent players (read: not me), I always wonder, do they not have the right to have that strength? If BBs are allowed to blast other BBs and cruisers away with well placed salvos, if cruisers are allowed to burn BBs to the water line, and if destroyers are allowed to delete careless players, then shouldn't CVs be allowed to delete targets if they go through the effort of properly setting up their planes?

 

The problem is that CVs can delete more things, more consistently, and the only way to counter them is with a [edited] mechanic that's practically all or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
Just now, issm said:

 

Considering how many other abilities they have - no.

 

The problem is that CVs can delete more things, more consistently, and the only way to counter them is with a [edited] mechanic that's practically all or nothing.

As a way of answering both points, CV players are often the only one in the air to defend against the other CV. Should they fail, the enemy CV will have a field day on your team mates. Thus, with such responsibilities, I think it is fair that they should in turn have such powers to reflect, a reciprocal to the phrase "with great power, comes great responsibility", a high risk high reward scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,602
[INTEL]
Members
8,399 posts
25,196 battles

I won't use them even if they are stealthier. It's too important to have the capability to torp DDs in smoke, or at least force them to exit the smoke.  

As someone pointed out above, you can get the same effects merely by adjusting the IJN torps a bit. Deep water torps are essentially a concession from WG that the Great IJN Torp Nerf was bad for the game. As many of us said at the time.

 

I also can't help pointing out that Deep Water torps are a gimmick that no one asked for, and as far as I can tell, won't be used much. Meanwhile, very simple changes that people have asked for, such as removing the 30 second timer in PvE, or giving us a button to remove all signals at once instead of one at a time, are ignored. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,339
Members
7,047 posts
4,534 battles

This may be just me, but I feel like you shouldn't really be taking torpedoes as a DD in the first place, so I don't think it's really going to affect the DD population. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
901 posts
4,218 battles
8 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

As a way of answering both points, CV players are often the only one in the air to defend against the other CV. Should they fail, the enemy CV will have a field day on your team mates. Thus, with such responsibilities, I think it is fair that they should in turn have such powers to reflect, a reciprocal to the phrase "with great power, comes great responsibility", a high risk high reward scenario.


So the fun I have in a game with a CV solely depends on a skill of my friendly CV and is completely unaffected by my skill when I am playing a dd? Is that what you are saying? Because that is exactly what happens right now. If your CV sucks majorly, no matter what you do in your dd or how good you are, enemy CV can either make you 100% useless, keep you spotted forever, or outright delete you. Only USN dds are somewhat safer with their DF.

I do not want to rely on lucky MM to decide if my game will be good or crap.

P.S. if deep water torpedoes are really effective against CAs and BBs, who cares if you cannot torpedo dds with them. How often do you even land those torpedoes on enemy dds?

Edited by Vaitmana
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[RIPQP]
Members
3,705 posts
14,455 battles

 An enemy Hsiang Yang (tier 10) killed our Fletcher with a torpedo about a week ago, looks like they are testing different stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
5 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

As a way of answering both points, CV players are often the only one in the air to defend against the other CV. Should they fail, the enemy CV will have a field day on your team mates. Thus, with such responsibilities, I think it is fair that they should in turn have such powers to reflect, a reciprocal to the phrase "with great power, comes great responsibility", a high risk high reward scenario.

 

Yeah, and that's the mindset which causes the problem where an imbalance in the skill of the player in one ship will easily cost you the game.

 

Sure, there's nothing inherently wrong with the idea of "more skill = more power", but there's a point where you're just putting too much power into the hands of one player, regardless how much skill that player has, and CVs go past that point. - they can deal damage to keep up with, or exceed BBs, while outspotting DDs, and being the only ship which ca effectively fend off their opposite. Way too much power for one ship.

 

Their spotting duties should be shifted to DDs and (maybe) CAs, while the air defense role is shifted onto ship AA.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
7 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I won't use them even if they are stealthier. It's too important to have the capability to torp DDs in smoke, or at least force them to exit the smoke.  

As someone pointed out above, you can get the same effects merely by adjusting the IJN torps a bit. Deep water torps are essentially a concession from WG that the Great IJN Torp Nerf was bad for the game. As many of us said at the time.

 

I also can't help pointing out that Deep Water torps are a gimmick that no one asked for, and as far as I can tell, won't be used much. Meanwhile, very simple changes that people have asked for, such as removing the 30 second timer in PvE, or giving us a button to remove all signals at once instead of one at a time, are ignored. 

I guess that it depends on just how much stealthier DWT's are.  

As for getting the same effect by adjusting IJN torps, that's only true if DWTs are IJN only.  If they're usable by any nation, then the effect is a little different.

People may not have asked for DWT's directly, but they have been asking for IJN torps to be more difficult to avoid/detect.  I suppose that this is their way of giving people the effect of what they want, just not how they expected to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles
23 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

They were supposed to be stealthier. Once I realized that, I wondered why WG wouldn't just un-nerf the IJN torpedoes at that point, instead of writing code for a whole new set of torpedoes.

I said the same thing.

Discussions on other threads, it was said that..

By un-nerfing IJN torps would show that they made a mistake and WG doesn't like to do that. There was much drama then and now over it.

They needed a new gimmick for the DD line to make it more attractive to masses since DDs aren't considered to be the "go to Ship Type" for veterans and new players alike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
7 minutes ago, Vaitmana said:


So the fun I have in a game with a CV solely depends on a skill of my friendly CV and is completely unaffected by my skill when I am playing a dd? Is that what you are saying? Because that is exactly what happens right now. If your CV sucks majorly, no matter what you do in your dd or how good you are, enemy CV can either make you 100% useless, keep you spotted forever, or outright delete you. Only USN dds are somewhat safer with their DF.

I do not want to rely on lucky MM to decide if my game will be good or crap.

P.S. if deep water torpedoes are really effective against CAs and BBs, who cares if you cannot torpedo dds with them. How often do you even land those torpedoes on enemy dds?

Indeed.

The problem with CV's is that the ability of the player to leverage their skill is much greater in CV's than other types.  At least that's how it seems to me.  A bad player in a CV is almost a non-entity, whereas a bad player in a regular ship usually gets something done.

And no other ship type has the ability to completely neutralize stealthy destroyers like a CV.  IMO, part of the problem here is that there's no range or time limit on how long CV planes can stay in the air.  I won't say that it should be really short, but at the same time, it shouldn't be unlimited.

How often does one land torps on DD's?  Actually, if you're firing torps into smoke, getting a hit and perhaps even a kill is a bonus.  The primary intent is usually to just hope to flush them out of the smoke.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[HCH]
Beta Testers
853 posts
7,167 battles
Just now, Vaitmana said:


So the fun I have in a game with a CV solely depends on a skill of my friendly CV and is completely unaffected by my skill when I am playing a dd? Is that what you are saying? Because that is exactly what happens right now. If your CV sucks majorly, no matter what you do in your dd or how good you are, enemy CV can either make you 100% useless, keep you spotted forever, or outright delete you. Only USN dds are somewhat safer with their DF.

I do not want to rely on lucky MM to decide if my game will be good or crap.

The battle in the air is decided solely between two players. Who ever wins that battle will grant their team a massive boon. Also, we already have MM deciding how our games go by putting us together with 11 other strangers of varying skill, so that's a moot point. When a CV is on the prowl, your main defence against him is huddling together with allied ships to pool together your AA fire power. Navies did this in history, and players do it in this game, the tactic is there, but DDs attempting lone wolf tactics will continue to face inevitable consequences of separating from the main fleet.

 

Just now, issm said:

 

Yeah, and that's the mindset which causes the problem where an imbalance in the skill of the player in one ship will easily cost you the game.

 

Sure, there's nothing inherently wrong with the idea of "more skill = more power", but there's a point where you're just putting too much power into the hands of one player, regardless how much skill that player has, and CVs go past that point. - they can deal damage to keep up with, or exceed BBs, while outspotting DDs, and being the only ship which ca effectively fend off their opposite. Way too much power for one ship.

 

Their spotting duties should be shifted to DDs and (maybe) CAs, while the air defense role is shifted onto ship AA.

Believe me, I'd love to be able to relegate some of the responsibilities of CVs to the other surface ships and be able to focus solely on damage and escorting my bombers, but if the power is reduced, to the point that said responsibilities are out of the CV players' hands, then wouldn't the 1 CV limit per team be no longer needed? Also, a skill mismatch is not a problem unique to CVs, but I suppose 1 CV per team simply magnifies the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

All the info on these are on the WG FB page if I'm not mistaken.

 

Found this on Armored Patrol..

 

WoWS 0.6.10: Deep Water Torpedoes Stats

Deep Water Torpedo Comp.
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Tier 5
Tier 6
Tier 7
Tier 8
Tier 9
Tier X
Torpedo Name
500mm G/6 AV
533mm Mark II
533mm Mark 11
533mm Mark VII
533mm 53-31
533mm Mark IX
533mm Mark 15 Mod 3
533mm Mark 16 Mod 1
533mm Mark 17
Torpedo Damage
10,600
10,000
11,733
15,733
14,400
15,867
16,633
19,033
17,900
“Deep Water” Damage
13,567
12,700
14,967
20,100
17,533
20,300
21,267
24,400
22,900
Torpedo Speed
49 knots
53 knots
56 knots
59 knots
60 knots
61 knots
55 knots
66 knots
68 knots
Torpedo Range
6.0 km
6.0 km
5.5 km
6.0 km
8.0 km
8.0 km
9.15 km
10.5 km
13.5 km
“Deep Water” Running Depth
4.2 meters
4.65 meters
5.1 meters
5.5 meters
5.5 meters
5.5 meters
5.85 meters
6.0 meters
6.15 meters
Torpedo Detection Range
0.9 km
1.1 km
1.1 km
1.2 km
1.2 km
1.3 km
1.1 km
1.4 km
1.4 km
“Deep Water” Detection Range
0.6 km
0.7 km
0.7 km
0.7 km
0.8 km
0.8 km
0.7 km
0.8 km
0.8 km

We speculate that the deepwater torpedoes will be similar to the AP/HE bomb choice the Enterprise has, by being a module that you can select before the battle. Of course, the stats here are not final, so expect changes before they go live.

 

 

Edited by Wulfgarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
12 minutes ago, issm said:

 

Yeah, and that's the mindset which causes the problem where an imbalance in the skill of the player in one ship will easily cost you the game.

 

Sure, there's nothing inherently wrong with the idea of "more skill = more power", but there's a point where you're just putting too much power into the hands of one player, regardless how much skill that player has, and CVs go past that point. - they can deal damage to keep up with, or exceed BBs, while outspotting DDs, and being the only ship which ca effectively fend off their opposite. Way too much power for one ship.

 

Their spotting duties should be shifted to DDs and (maybe) CAs, while the air defense role is shifted onto ship AA.

Before I get started, let me create a term to describe this.  I'll refer to it as the Skill Multiplier.  Every ship and ship type can be thought of as having a Skill Multiplier, which represents how much can the skill of the player enhance the abilities of the ship or ship type.  It seems to me that carriers have the greatest Skill Multiplier because very good players can make their CV's borderline if not outright OP while bad players can make their CV's non-entities.

Now, what I think needs to occur is a reworking that would reduce the skill multiplier of CVs so that the best players can't turn the ship into an OP force of nature, while weak CV players aren't reduced to useless piles of goo by the complexity of playing a CV.  That said, I have no idea how one could do this, short of removing all of the "alt' attacks and going with strictly automatic attacks, which could take things possibly too far in the other direction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×