Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Gunsliinger510

So far, this is the only SUBMARINE spotted in gameplay...

149 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles

The spotting pictured below is circa 2016...

...and FYI:

This is meant to spark discussion.  There's still a very large PRO-SUB faction of players.  Yeah, yeah...we know they said "never", but we will always hope that the ANTI-SUB developers will some day see the merits of what submarines could do for this game. 

At the very least, entertain the idea of adding submarines and ASW features to ships and planes. 

We understand that introducing submarines directly into current multiplayer game play would be disruptive, but a CO-OP mission or separate mode of battle would be an excellent way to let players at least test and enjoy them (just like bath tub, night or space battles)

Please respond with the PROS and CONS you believe subs would affect the game with.

sub wow.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 7
  • Angry 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,143 posts
3,273 battles

Well HMAS Perth and HMCS Haida with their Smoke sort of comes close for playstyle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,489
[O_O]
Members
4,432 posts
9,618 battles

The April 1 Bathtub sub was NOT the only sub that has been seen in the game.  

There was another sub in one of the arctic maps, outside the boundary, that was part of the scenery for a bit.

Then there was the sub that was put in our ports (unplayable, of course) during another April 1 event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[SPTR]
Members
20,099 posts
5,398 battles

Search the topic. Millions of reasons. Stop this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
1 minute ago, desmo_2 said:

The April 1 Bathtub sub was NOT the only sub that has been seen in the game.  

There was another sub in one of the arctic maps, outside the boundary, that was part of the scenery for a bit.

Then there was the sub that was put in our ports (unplayable, of course) during another April 1 event.

"...in gameplay"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,279
[RKLES]
Members
7,239 posts
9,038 battles

Also a Yellow Sub in World of Tanks Blitz Mirage map in the iPhone corner underwater.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
3 minutes ago, khaenn35 said:

Search the topic. Millions of reasons. Stop this. 

It's just a discussion, "millions of reasons" for and against.  Sorry to hurt your feelings.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
Just now, Gunsliinger510 said:

It's just a discussion

That's been done to death.

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[SPTR]
Members
20,099 posts
5,398 battles
3 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

It's just a discussion, "millions of reasons" for and against.  Sorry to hurt your feelings.

 

2 minutes ago, Lert said:

That's been done to death.

And this.

 

image.png

Edited by khaenn35

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
27 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

so, what's the harm in another thread?

If I come asking you what day today is, thirtyseven times in three hours, you're going to get annoyed and pissed off as well.

Use the search function. It's there for a reason. Everything that can or needs to be said has been said literally dozens of times.

<Edit>

But, let me reiterate ...

Subs are not good for this game because of many reasons, including but not limited to:

  • Subs are hella slow. As in, the vast majority of era appropriate submarines do 1/3 to 1/2 the speed of the slowest ships in the game at this point. Good luck actually catching up to the battle.
  • Over half the ships in this game literally have zero ASW capability. And you think it'd be a good idea to implement a ship type that's literally invulnerable to half the ships in the game.
  • The 'sneaky torpedo ambusher' type gameplay is already occupied, by DDs. So there's no need to implement submarines, there are already whole tech trees of ships that do what subs would do, but better.
  • There is no map geometry below the waterline.
  • Subs have fixed torpedo tubes that don't swivel. WG has, for ease of game play reasons, elected not to implement torpedo tubes that don't swivel.
  • Subs have submerged torpedo tubes. See above point.
  • Submarines were not fleet combatants. This game is about fleet combat. In fact, submarines, per rule, tried to avoid fleet combat. They were raiders.
  • WG already can't get the game play balance right with carriers, and you want to add a completely new diverging game play element.

So, submarines followed a meta that doesn't exist in this game, are too slow to be useful in this game, have weapons that don't exist in this game, fill a niche that is already filled in this game, and half the ships in this game would have literally no way of combating them when they're submerged.

  • Cool 11
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
Just now, Lert said:

If I come asking you what day today is, thirtyseven times in three hours, you're going to get annoyed and pissed off as well.

then maybe you would get a clue that there's a ton of players who want it.  I even offered a solution that won't disrupt existing games with subs...

 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[WOLF3]
Members
6,492 posts
2,439 battles

That's not a sub.  That's a re-skinned island. 

NO SUBS.

Now go away.

stock-vector-don-t-feed-the-troll-sign-5

Edited by iDuckman
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
1 minute ago, iDuckman said:

That's not a sub.  That's a re-skinned island. 

NO SUBS.

Now go away.

 

islands don't bob around and move...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
4 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

then maybe you would get a clue that there's a ton of players who want it.

Which means ... what exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,243
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,724 posts
9,112 battles
3 minutes ago, Lert said:

If I come asking you what day today is, thirtyseven times in three hours, you're going to get annoyed and pissed off as well.

Use the search function. It's there for a reason. Everything that can or needs to be said has been said literally dozens of times.

 

1 minute ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

then maybe you would get a clue that there's a ton of players who want it.  I even offered a solution that won't disrupt existing games with subs...

 

There are also a "ton" of players that don't want them because the reasons against far outweigh the reasons for them. On the bright side it has been awhile since a sub thread because of the radar panic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
11 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 

There are also a "ton" of players that don't want them because the reasons against far outweigh the reasons for them. On the bright side it has been awhile since a sub thread because of the radar panic.

 

so if there was a SEPARATE battle mode with subs, you would still feel like they are hurting your sub free games? lmbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[WOLF3]
Members
6,492 posts
2,439 battles

Look, do some research.  WG won't put subs into the game because they CAN'T. 

You sound like a little princess gaslighting her parents because she wants a pony.  You ain't getting a pony.  Period.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
3 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

so if there was a SEPARATE battle mode with subs, you would still feel like they are hurting your sub free games? lmbo

So in order to implement subs in World of Warships, you want to bend World of Warships to the point where it wouldn't be World of Warships anymore just so you can have your subs? And dilute the playerbase, while MM already has trouble making fair matches with the playerbase we have?

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
1 minute ago, iDuckman said:

Look, do some research.  WG won't put subs into the game because they CAN'T. 

You sound like a little princess gaslighting her parents because she wants a pony.  You ain't getting a pony.  Period.

 

"CAN'T" is not the same as "WON'T", it can be done.  Especially if they can charge more for it.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[BTH]
Beta Testers
125 posts
6,046 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

So in order to implement subs in World of Warships, you want to bend World of Warships to the point where it wouldn't be World of Warships anymore just so you can have your subs? And dilute the playerbase, while MM already has trouble making fair matches with the playerbase we have?

a lot of player base has left because they won't include subs...can youthink of a better way to bring them back?  It's not like there's any trouble finding players in RB during Ranked play.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
2 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

a lot of player base has left because they won't include subs...can youthink of a better way to bring them back?  It's not like there's any trouble finding players in RB during Ranked play.

1) "a lot of player abse has left because they won't include subs" - your source on this? Because I call [edited].

2) "a lot of players want it" is your only argument, while I've given you actual arguments not to include subs. Try countering those first, if you actually have an argument to stand on to begin with, other than "well people want it, so".

Here, I'll repeat my actual arguments:

 

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,048
[HINON]
Supertester
19,278 posts
12,830 battles
29 minutes ago, Lert said:

Subs are not good for this game because of many reasons, including but not limited to:

  • Subs are hella slow. As in, the vast majority of era appropriate submarines do 1/3 to 1/2 the speed of the slowest ships in the game at this point. Good luck actually catching up to the battle.
  • Over half the ships in this game literally have zero ASW capability. And you think it'd be a good idea to implement a ship type that's literally invulnerable to half the ships in the game.
  • The 'sneaky torpedo ambusher' type gameplay is already occupied, by DDs. So there's no need to implement submarines, there are already whole tech trees of ships that do what subs would do, but better.
  • There is no map geometry below the waterline.
  • Subs have fixed torpedo tubes that don't swivel. WG has, for ease of game play reasons, elected not to implement torpedo tubes that don't swivel.
  • Subs have submerged torpedo tubes. See above point.
  • Submarines were not fleet combatants. This game is about fleet combat. In fact, submarines, per rule, tried to avoid fleet combat. They were raiders.
  • WG already can't get the game play balance right with carriers, and you want to add a completely new diverging game play element.

So, submarines followed a meta that doesn't exist in this game, are too slow to be useful in this game, have weapons that don't exist in this game, fill a niche that is already filled in this game, and half the ships in this game would have literally no way of combating them when they're submerged.

Counter these, if you can.

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[WOLF3]
Members
6,492 posts
2,439 battles
3 minutes ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

"CAN'T" is not the same as "WON'T", it can be done.

I suppose that is literally true.  Got a few million $$ ?  Much can be done with it.

 

Quote

  Especially if they can charge more for it.

Are you dense?  This is a free-to-play game.  Perhaps you're suggesting that WG change their business model just for you.

 

No pony!  Get over it.

 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,774 posts
8,328 battles
1 hour ago, Gunsliinger510 said:

The spotting pictured below is circa 2016...

...and FYI:

This is meant to spark discussion.  There's still a very large PRO-SUB faction of players.  Yeah, yeah...we know they said "never", but we will always hope that the ANTI-SUB developers will some day see the merits of what submarines could do for this game. 

At the very least, entertain the idea of adding submarines and ASW features to ships and planes. 

We understand that introducing submarines directly into current multiplayer game play would be disruptive, but a CO-OP mission or separate mode of battle would be an excellent way to let players at least test and enjoy them (just like bath tub, night or space battles)

Please respond with the PROS and CONS you believe subs would affect the game with.

sub wow.jpg

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO STOP ASKING

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.

×