Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
GreyFox78659

The more I think about it the it come back to submarines are coming to WoWS.

235 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles

Yep another one.

 

Yeah sorry BB and CV players huray for DD and Cruiser players. The carrier fix just doesn’t add up. It would mean a totally rebalance if every ship in the game. But removing them and adding subs would mean a simple change to certain ships both cruiser and destroyers to add depth charges. AA wouldn’t need to be touched  the values could be left in place just not used. Only two line would be removed with four to five sub lines being quickly added in their place. Not including premiums. 

Sorry, but from a money making and balancing stand point it just makes more sense. Not only that but it would mean the WT naval would no longer be a direct competitor for now.

Edited by GreyFox78659
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,774 posts

Reset the clock to zero days since last submarine post.   No Suibs WILL NOT be added to the game

0 Days Since Last Accident - Futurama GIF - Futurama Fry Sign GIFs
 
 
Judge Judy Isn't Havin It GIF - Judgejudy Facepalm GIFs
 
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles
5 minutes ago, torpsRus said:

Reset the clock to zero days since last submarine post.   No Suibs WILL NOT be added to the game

0 Days Since Last Accident - Futurama GIF - Futurama Fry Sign GIFs
 
 
Judge Judy Isn't Havin It GIF - Judgejudy Facepalm GIFs
 

Sorry but the writing is on the wall Asashio was probably the last straw at controlling BB numbers and a test to see it deep water torpedoes that can only attack BBs are a viable weapon. They are it was the platform a DD that failed not the torpedoes.

Edited by GreyFox78659

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
411 posts

Give WG a generous grant to 3D model an ocean floor with islands. Ask for a quote.

I think it will happen in the far future, but there isnt a major demand or outcry for them at the moment.

Or do I have to post The Chieftain video clip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,357 battles

What.

WHAT?!

BB numbers are fine, if anything CA numbers are up, this topic has been shot down and ridiculed so many times I don't see why you even try. For example, how would a BB even touch a Sub? BBs have only their mains, no depth charges, and unlike CVs, BBs can't shoot down subs torps. So it means that subs would be absolutely immune from one class, which is completely broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,990
[PVE]
Members
8,982 posts
7,315 battles
10 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Yep another one.

 

Yeah sorry BB and CV players huray for DD and Cruiser players. The carrier fix just doesn’t add up. It would mean a totally rebalance if every ship in the game. But removing them and adding subs would mean a simple change to certain ships both cruiser and destroyers to add depth charges. AA wouldn’t need to be touched  the values could be left in place just not used. Only two line would be removed with four to five sub lines being quickly added in their place. Not including premiums. 

Sorry, but from a money making and balancing stand point it just makes more sense. Not only that but it would mean the WT naval would no longer be a direct competitor for now.

 

Subs are WAY too slow and too fragile to make good player ships. The ONLY way, and I mean ONLY way, would be to have subs be red ships in an operation. But that would take a lot of work on adding depth charges (more than being pretty sprites on the deck) to DDs and CLs, so don't hold your breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles

Ok looking forward on the Carrier front a good chunk of the RN CV line is going to be paper designs and they are the last Navy to have a sizable amount of carriers in WW2. 

Looking forward to submarines every Navy had them including the the Pan Asian navies. Oh wait, what was that market WoWS was trying to tap into again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles

I bet torpedoes will be changable to shorter range torpedoes that can attack anything and then long range ones attack only BBs.

Edited by GreyFox78659

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,357 battles

Hold on, so WG will be removing a semi decent class to add in one that the community as a whole hates??

Please explain why they would do this dumb as :etc_swear:decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[SUCIT]
Members
783 posts
3,509 battles
22 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Sorry but the writing is on the wall Asashio was probably the last straw at controlling BB numbers and a test to see it deep water torpedoes that can only attack BBs are a viable weapon. They are it was the platform a DD that failed not the torpedoes.

You do realize that CA has taken over as the most played class, right?

Edited by XpliCT_PaiiN
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles

The more I do thought experiments on this the more it seems that is what is going on. 

Show me any of this new carrier play footage. There isn’t any and they don’t want to show you the submarines footage because well this thread is evidence why.

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,357 battles
Just now, GreyFox78659 said:

The more I do thought experiments on this the more it seems that is what is going on. 

Show me any of this new carrier play footage. There isn’t any and they don’t want to show you the submarines footage because well this thread is evidence why.

There's no CV play footage because the second they release it the community will blow up, like it did with Alabama. 

Secondly, in no thought experiment of mine will this work out. Balance issues are OP.

Lastly WG has not done any sub promos then and have not even been subtle about their dislike of the sub idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,581
[ERN]
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
10,101 posts
4,223 battles

they are already in the game, we just can't see them

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[CUTE]
[CUTE]
Members
124 posts
4,251 battles

monkas 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles
9 minutes ago, megadeux said:

There's no CV play footage because the second they release it the community will blow up, like it did with Alabama. 

Secondly, in no thought experiment of mine will this work out. Balance issues are OP.

Lastly WG has not done any sub promos then and have not even been subtle about their dislike of the sub idea. 

Next line is RN DDs.

You know the DDs that were really good sub hunters and not that good at much else.

Edited by GreyFox78659
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,357 battles
1 minute ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Next line is RN DDs.

This has no relevance to my statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,341
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,426 posts
4,312 battles
18 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Ok looking forward on the Carrier front a good chunk of the RN CV line is going to be paper designs and they are the last Navy to have a sizable amount of carriers in WW2. 

You quite clearly don't know much about RN carriers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[BNKR]
Members
657 posts
664 battles

I'm pretty sure they don't want to control the number of battleships in the game, when a large portion of those are premiums that people have paid for, and will continue to purchase. The Dev blogs revealing Jean Bart and Freiderich are evidence enough that they're not trying to control battleship numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

This game revolves around shared vision. A submarine with that level of information in a game like this would make CVs without mirror match making look like the epitome of balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles
2 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

You quite clearly don't know much about RN carriers.

Question how other countries have sizable carriers numbers during WW2? Yeah thought so. Also England had really compromised designs with small hangars so good luck with a meta that demands huge hangars. So yes they might get have some carriers to fill a line but none are really viable in this games meta. Unless you go the GZ OP route good luck with that.

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

I mean think about it, to hit a submarine with a depth charge, your path and the submarine's path have to basically intersect at the right window. But the submarine can stay close enough to friendlies to prevent anyone from being able to cross over them without being killed, let alone without being spotted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,521 battles
5 minutes ago, cometguy said:

This game revolves around shared vision. A submarine with that level of information in a game like this would make CVs without mirror match making look like the epitome of balance.

It’s still much easier to balance submarines than carriers just because you don’t want to admit does makes it so. Carriers by their nature can control the battle arena. Subs by their nature are glass cannons. Once they are vulnerable on the surface they are dead but until they are on the surface they can sink anything. Carriers can just stay on the side of the map and spam planes till they run out and survive the match even if they loose.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,774 posts
1 minute ago, GreyFox78659 said:

It’s still much easier to balance submarines than carriers just because you don’t want to admit does makes it so. Carriers by their nature can control the battle arena. Subs by their nature are glass cannons. Once they are vulnerable on the surface they are dead but until they are on the surface they can sink anything. Carriers can just stay on the side of the map and spam planes till they run out and survive the match even if they loose.

Thats A No GIF - SimonCowell ThatsANo ItsANo GIFs
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
665
[-VT3-]
Members
1,611 posts
3,346 battles

To the contrary, the more I think about it, the it the more it the think the.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×