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

Submarines and WOWS.

88 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles

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)

300px-USS_Gato;0821201.jpg

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? 

220px-Buyo_Maru_sinking.jpg

 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles

*twitch*

Destroyers already fill the niche of cap contesters and sneaky torpedo ninjas, and do it a lot faster and with a lot more firepower than submarines. Why would anyone ever drive a 15 knot ship with half the torpedo alpha potential of a 36 knot one at the same tier, that fills the same role? Good luck catching up to the battle, it'll be over before you're half way there.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

*twitch*

(snip)

I am disappointed in you, normally you read at least half a post before replying.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
Just now, DarthZeppelin said:

I am disappointed in you, normally you read at least half a post before replying.

I assure you, I put more effort into reading your post than you did in thinking through your bullcrap suggestion. Answer my question.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
2 minutes ago, Lert said:

I assure you, I put more effort into reading your post than you did in thinking through your bullcrap suggestion. Answer my question.

from my "bullcrap" OP : 

6 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

Submarine spawn points would need to take account of their miserably low speed (surfaced) and spawn subs considerably in advance of their team mates.
 

6 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

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? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[SPTR]
Members
3,582 posts
631 battles

"Fired my two torpedoes, time to wait 3 minutes for that reload while I contribute nothing else."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
5 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

from my "bullcrap" OP : 

So your solution is to make concession upon concession upon concession to fill a niche that is already filled, with a ship that is worse at it than the ship that already fills that niche.

THINK for a moment. ACTUALLY THINK.

How much fun will it be for someone in a - lets take your example Gato class submarine as example - a 9 knot ship - with the same role as ships that do almost 40 knots with speed boost, and have double the alpha potential? Even if you have your unique spawn points, here, you're spawned near A, the battle is at B and C, congratulations you're entirely useless for the entire match stuck in a boringly slow ship that can only wave at the rest of its team as even a freaking Bogue looks like speed racer compared to your ship. Woooo, a battleship-sniper that goes half the speed of the slowest battleship in the game. A cap contester that's so @#%$@# slow that even if it spawned in the exact middle of the map, destroyers would be speeding past you at nearly 4 times your speed and still beat you to the enemy cap, after making a detour to nab a battleship kill or two.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
Just now, 6Xero9 said:

"Fired my two torpedoes, time to wait 3 minutes for that reload while I contribute nothing else."

good point. How do other torpedo firing ships deal with the problem of real world reload times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

So your solution is to make concession upon concession upon concession to fill a niche that is already filled, with a ship that is worse at it than the ship that already fills that niche.

THINK for a moment. ACTUALLY THINK.

How much fun will it be for someone in a - lets take your example Gato class submarine as example - a 9 knot ship - with the same role as ships that do almost 40 knots with speed boost, and have double the alpha potential? Even if you have your unique spawn points, here, you're spawned near A, the battle is at B and C, congratulations you're entirely useless for the entire match stuck in a boringly slow ship that can only wave at the rest of its team as even a freaking bogue looks like speed racer compared to your ship. Woooo, a battleship-sniper that goes half the speed of the slowest battleship in the game.

I personally doubt most current players of WOWS would enjoy subs, but I refer you once again to my OP

11 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles

"What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith?"

The exact same problems that we've been outlining LITERALLY FOR YEARS NOW.

- Subs are not fleet combat ships historically, the were commerce raiders

- Subs are too slow

- The niche subs would fill is already filled

- WG already can't properly balance four ship types and you want to add a fifth that plays entirely differently?

- Being the slowest and weakest thing on the map would lead to incredibly tediously boring gameplay on maps designed to be played with ships three times as fast! And before you suggest smaller maps, that would make the faster ships not work. And before you suggest making the submarines faster: do you actually want proper submarines with a basis in history, or magic submersible drivable missiles that fire smaller missiles, straight from fantasy?

Subs would be boring to play, inflexible, weak, useless and superfluous for the purposes of this game. The topic has been analyzed and debated to death both internally in WG offices as well as on this forum, to the point where WG DEVS EVEN ADDRESSED IT IN A VIDEO.

But, suuuuuuuuuuure, your idea is 'unique' and your viewpoint magically solves aaaaaaaaall the problems that LITERALLY YEARS OF OVERDONE FORUM THREADS AND THE ENTIRETY OF WG DEVS HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO ADDRESS.

Well, you've not addressed any of the real problems other than with a weak attempt with 'give them other spawn points'. That 'solution' like using a wash cloth to stop a 4 ft leak in a sinking ship, it gives only a very meager illusion of actually addressing the major problems.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
352
[D12]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,065 posts
8,857 battles

sub threads should be locked with this message

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles

@Lert, you can read, but you cannot  understand just what you have read. Do you understand the "devil's advocate" expression? Do you understand :

"What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith?" This is not a proposal for new content, which is why I posted in offtopic.

Your behaviour is little different to one liner crap posting and no platforming in other threads by some others. Set an example.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
Just now, STINKWEED_ said:

I thought the "S" word was forbidden? 

 

untitled.png

Well, most people avoid it because you either need to be stupid, brave, or both, to make a topic entitled "Submarines":Smile_glasses:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
6 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

"What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith?"

Simple.

There are only problems that we cannot overcome,  BECAUSE THEY'RE INHERENTLY TIED TO THE VERY CONCEPT OF SUBS AS THEY EXISTED AND WERE USED HISTORICALLY.

So the answer to your question is: none. There are no problems that remain that we can overcome.

I can explain it to you, but I can not make you understand it seems. Please try and apply some brain and ACTUALLY THINK. Try it some time. You might be surprised. BTW, you still haven't addressed any of those things I mentioned, yet seem entirely too focused on how you don't think I've addressed your points exactly to the precise wording.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[SPTR]
Members
3,582 posts
631 battles
3 minutes ago, DarthZeppelin said:

"What problems remain that we could overcome, if we tried, in good faith?"

You want an answer to this question? Ok then, here's your answer: All of them. Why? Because the problems that remain are not issues that can be overcome. A merchant ship is easier to sink because it's not a floating gun battery that was designed with the idea that it would be shot at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,086
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,700 posts
10,050 battles

Submarines historically rarely managed to pull off attacks in any kind of coordination with surface forces (also a problem with carriers in-game). If you look at ships sunk by submarines they were rarely engaged with surface ships within the same day, let alone within 20 minutes. The counter to submarines was typically time, patience and an incredible level of team work - that does not sound like a random battle to me.

 

What that means in-game will be that submarines are griefers. They spawn near a cap, move into it, throw torpedoes with pretty much impunity. One of the major weaknesses of ASW weapons of WWII is range. Depth charges effectively have zero, Hedgehog gets 0.25km, Squid gets about the same, post-war Limbo finally gets to about 1km and the USN's Weapon Alfa a little less than that.

In game this means that so long as a submarine sticks even slightly close to it's team mates it's nigh-on invincible. The Sub on the far side of the cap spamming torpedoes you can't do anything about because to detect it you need to close to suicidal range and to engage it you need to be sitting on top of it. Will you drive your Benson across the cap, spotted at 5.8km, cover the distance to within 2km if they're at periscope depth, just do nothing if they then submerge fully and still have to cover the last 2km to drop a weapon? No you won't as that's completely and utterly unreasonable.

Even if a new class of ASDIC or similar were to be installed as standard on destroyers providing better detection range the problem of doing damage due to the range of available weapons absolutely remains. As it is it's somewhat ironic that the Z-52 will be the best ASW destroyer in the game with her 5.9km hydro and that most cruisers will have better options than most destroyers...

 

Submarines will only slow and gum up the game, provide people with invincible (if boring) platforms to ever-so-slowly farm damage from with no real counter aside from speed, which will be scant comfort to the players trying to deal with them. Like mines, MTB/PT/E-boat/MAS, land-borne aircraft and carriers submarines have no real workable niche as I can see it in the game.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
2 minutes ago, mofton said:

Submarines historically rarely managed to pull off attacks in any kind of coordination with surface forces (also a problem with carriers in-game). If you look at ships sunk by submarines they were rarely engaged with surface ships within the same day, let alone within 20 minutes. The counter to submarines was typically time, patience and an incredible level of team work - that does not sound like a random battle to me.

What that means in-game will be that submarines are griefers. They spawn near a cap, move into it, throw torpedoes with pretty much impunity. One of the major weaknesses of ASW weapons of WWII is range. Depth charges effectively have zero, Hedgehog gets 0.25km, Squid gets about the same, post-war Limbo finally gets to about 1km and the USN's Weapon Alfa a little less than that.

In game this means that so long as a submarine sticks even slightly close to it's team mates it's nigh-on invincible. The Sub on the far side of the cap spamming torpedoes you can't do anything about because to detect it you need to close to suicidal range and to engage it you need to be sitting on top of it. Will you drive your Benson across the cap, spotted at 5.8km, cover the distance to within 2km if they're at periscope depth, just do nothing if they then submerge fully and still have to cover the last 2km to drop a weapon? No you won't as that's completely and utterly unreasonable.

Even if a new class of ASDIC or similar were to be installed as standard on destroyers providing better detection range the problem of doing damage due to the range of available weapons absolutely remains. As it is it's somewhat ironic that the Z-52 will be the best ASW destroyer in the game with her 5.9km hydro and that most cruisers will have better options than most destroyers...

Submarines will only slow and gum up the game, provide people with invincible (if boring) platforms to ever-so-slowly farm damage from with no real counter aside from speed, which will be scant comfort to the players trying to deal with them. Like mines, MTB/PT/E-boat/MAS, land-borne aircraft and carriers submarines have no real workable niche as I can see it in the game.

Oh don't even bother with all that reasonable theorizing. We've been saying the exact same thing for LITERALLY YEARS, and apparently all those hundreds of times the EXACT SAME THINGS were brought up aren't good enough for this troll OP. What makes you think that this time the same exact arguments will be sufficient?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
88 posts
1,264 battles

I shall refer to this thread as - Submarine thread #24491

Heresy detected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,086
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,700 posts
10,050 battles
3 minutes ago, Lert said:

Oh don't even bother with all that reasonable theorizing. We've been saying the exact same thing for LITERALLY YEARS, and apparently all those hundreds of times the EXACT SAME THINGS were brought up aren't good enough for this troll OP. What makes you think that this time the same exact arguments will be sufficient?

I was playing Double-Devil's Advocate! ;)

 

You are right, though the weapon range problem doesn't seem to be bought up much as a counter and it's my pet-theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,346
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,540 posts
6,685 battles
15 minutes ago, Lert said:

Simple.

There are only problems that we cannot overcome,  BECAUSE THEY'RE INHERENTLY TIED TO THE VERY CONCEPT OF SUBS AS THEY EXISTED AND WERE USED HISTORICALLY.

So the answer to your question is: none. There are no problems that remain that we can overcome.

I can explain it to you, but I can not make you understand it seems. Please try and apply some brain and ACTUALLY THINK.

Well, this getting a tad hysterical, caps and all.

 

15 minutes ago, mofton said:

What that means in-game will be that submarines are griefers. They spawn near a cap, move into it, throw torpedoes with pretty much impunity. One of the major weaknesses of ASW weapons of WWII is range. Depth charges effectively have zero, Hedgehog gets 0.25km, Squid gets about the same, post-war Limbo finally gets to about 1km and the USN's Weapon Alfa a little less than that.

Asashio at t8 can do that, Shima at tier 10 can spam torps all day long (and does).

Obviously some fantasy would be needed to both limit submarine torpedo range, while counters to submerged subs are not as problematic as might be thought. A fully submerged sub of this era would be largely blind, unable to fire torps with any accurate lock (not so different to a dd hiding in smoke). Detectable with hydro, very limited submerged time (3x1 minute over the course of a battle). Subs would spend most of their time, on the surface. So in answer to your question, why yes, the Benson would have every reason to drive over and force the sub to submerge (if the sub has an available "oxygen" consumeable), because forcing the sub to submerge suppresses the subs ability to attack other ships. While if it has no "oxygen" consumeable left, it is as good as sunk by the dd. Even if it submerges (which let's say, for the game would take time (10 seconds for example), it would be vulnerable to a hydro and depth charges combination. (I'll admit, you have me struggling here..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
Just now, mofton said:

You are right, though the weapon range problem doesn't seem to be bought up much as a counter and it's my pet-theory.

It's just one of the many, many, MANY reasons submarines wouldn't work in this game, and one I will endeavor to bring up the next time someone makes the same tired thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,561
[HINON]
Supertester
18,979 posts
12,488 battles
Just now, DarthZeppelin said:

Well, this getting a tad hysterical, caps and all.

And you're still not addressing a single point I made.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×