Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
AJTP89

Submarine Poll

Do you Support Subs in WOWS?  

434 members have voted

  1. 1. Do You Want Subs in WOWS?

    • Yes, subs implemented properly will be a great addition to the game
    • IF WG can balance them properly, then sure, why not
    • Probably not as they're nearly impossible to balance
    • No, Subs will break the game.

178 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

580
[WOLF5]
Members
1,828 posts
2,524 battles

Alright, with the news today that subs are coming to WOWS, there have been a zillion threads going up, both for and against. Let's make it official and see who is for and who is against subs and why.

4 options, trying to cover the range. Feel free to explain your choice, you just love subs, just hate subs, or have legitimate concerns about the balancing.

My personal opinion is that WG is aware of the balancing issues (why they have said for 3 years that subs aren't happening), but now think they can balance them and implement them. Thus they know they have a tricky balancing job coming up, and are acting accordingly. I also think 2019 is ambitious, the CV rework is a smaller affair, and is delayed by 2 years from when they said they would fix them.

I think it will have positive effect on the game. They will counter BBs, which the DD people reasonably complain are OP, and they will give DDs a massive new job (though even more to be blamed for by the BBs). I also wonder if aircraft will have a role in ASW. Also, they mention that spotting mechanics will have to be different for subs. Which may mean the overall spotting system may be changed, which could allow changes to the way radar works.

If you somehow missed the news, links below.

https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/18/why-wargaming-is-disrupting-world-of-warships-with-submarines-and-revamped-aircraft-carriers/

 

Also, we now need a new forum meme to replace the sub thread one. Toss an idea in below.

  • Cool 2
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
348
[SDIWO]
Members
1,186 posts
6,078 battles

I don't know if I'd say they're going to break the game, more that they have no place in the battles being fought.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[FLS]
Alpha Tester
651 posts
2,875 battles

IF they are implemented well, submarines could be a positive addition to the game. That's a very big 'if', giving Wargaming's track record. If I'm honest, I rather hope the Halloween event doesn't work out and that's the end of it.

If they are going to follow through with it, they need to be unflinchingly guided by one principle: 

Don't. ****. It. Up.

Historically, that hasn't been their strength.

--Helms

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
409
[TDD]
Members
1,017 posts
8,219 battles

bad idea is a bad idea

not to mention were not fleet combatants during this time they primarily went after non warships. Others can explain it better than me . but this is flat out a bad, break this game, idea

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
50 posts
1,832 battles

If implemented, they better be a class cannon class. Any sub with holes, especially from 18inch shells  isn’t submerging again anytime soon. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,748
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
4,291 posts

Imagine everything that people complain about with DDs in this game -- both DD-lovers and DD-haters.  All the complaints each way.

Now increase by an order of magnitude. 

Submerging would be a lot like smoke, only harder for others to spot without hydrophones, and reducing the max speed to a pittance, and causing serious vision issues for the sub itself.   A submarine spotted would be a sitting duck. 

Surface speed would also be a problem, with even a surfaced sub unable to run away from trouble the way DDs can -- less than 20 knots in most cases.

Armament would be a relatively small number of torpedo tubes, and 0 to 2 small naval canon. 

Etc.

They'd be the ultimate troll ships, trolling the player or trolling the other players, ever battle.

 

 

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,020
Members
4,714 posts
7,322 battles

You all like more torps coming at you?  If yes then vote subs up. That is how subs kill....torps... as everyone knows. I played a random this morning with carriers and 5 DDs per side. It was all about dodging torps. Got pretty crazy. Subs?  I dunno. Just don't know and NO ONE will until they are actually put in the game. If they will be good for the games is just speculation until they are implemented. IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,504
[SALVO]
Members
19,010 posts
19,219 battles

Can't we just have a simple poll without the damned commentaries included in the responses?  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
610
[H_]
Members
1,503 posts

An extinction level event boys....

There are real sub veterans playing this game lads.....  Skimmer vets are great guys and good players but, the sub community is another can of worms......entirely.   Sub mechanics in this game are going to be just about impossible.  Maps are too small and the water is too shallow to allow for effective sub use.  If they implemented subs by year, the later subs would be freaking dangerous; a new meta if properly implemented.  In WW2, aircraft "found most subs" not picket ships.  Radar was extensively used and that means more radar; especially, for the IJN..............it's how the IJN found and killed Allied subs !!!!

Yes, many of the sub guys I play with are outright Giddy !!!!   But, they know subs are just another WG gimmick.......  Be warned, that if they aren't a gimmick, well, "abandon all joy..."  And that, scares me.......and, they are my friends and I've seen them in SIMS and other games that have subs.......oh Boy, you have no idea just how bad subs can be, even if they never fire a torpedo......

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,572 posts
1,687 battles
10 minutes ago, alexbuildit said:

If implemented, they better be a class cannon class. Any sub with holes, especially from 18inch shells  isn’t submerging again anytime soon. 

Oh, it will submerge.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,254 posts

As long as hydro spots them above and under water... And planes can see them at periscope depth or surface... Can only cap surfaced. Then I don't have any problem with them being in the game.

I'll never play them however. 

P.S.

Of course they can never shoot torps or see targets unless they are at periscope depth or surfaced. They will also be the slowest in the game.

Edited by MorbidGamer
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,608
[INTEL]
Members
9,541 posts
27,167 battles

We have a ship that strikes with impunity without being struck in return and about which its targets can do nothing. It's called a CV.

And it is widely hated. Widely. 

This idea is stupid beyond belief. I can't believe I just read that dev blog post. 

Meanwhile there are 18 million posts calling for simple fixes that would make the game 100x better, including fixes to all the wonky stuff in the interface -- still can't get anything as simple as a button to demount all signals at once  -- but WG has the devs wasting their time making submarines. We. need. new. maps.

I think we've reached the point in the development of the game where the devs have succeeded in wrecking it. I will probably move on once this garbage starts appearing in the game. 

Edited by Taichunger
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,135
[ARGSY]
Members
8,789 posts
5,919 battles

You forgot "Sure, but only in operations or their own specific mode." (i.e. not in normal random, ranked, clan etc. battles.)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
94
[OKM]
Members
214 posts
2,382 battles
14 minutes ago, nina_blain_73 said:

bad idea is a bad idea

not to mention were not fleet combatants during this time they primarily went after non warships. Others can explain it better than me . but this is flat out a bad, break this game, idea

Well, they went after any kind of ships and sinked more IJN warship than American BB. And I still fails to see how they can break the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,022
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
18,028 posts
10,486 battles
29 minutes ago, LubzinNJ said:

I don't know if I'd say they're going to break the game, more that they have no place in the battles being fought.

 

12 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

Imagine everything that people complain about with DDs in this game -- both DD-lovers and DD-haters.  All the complaints each way.

Now increase by an order of magnitude. 

Submerging would be a lot like smoke, only harder for others to spot without hydrophones, and reducing the max speed to a pittance, and causing serious vision issues for the sub itself.   A submarine spotted would be a sitting duck. 

Surface speed would also be a problem, with even a surfaced sub unable to run away from trouble the way DDs can -- less than 20 knots in most cases.

Armament would be a relatively small number of torpedo tubes, and 0 to 2 small naval canon. 

Etc.

They'd be the ultimate troll ships, trolling the player or trolling the other players, ever battle.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

You forgot "Sure, but only in operations or their own specific mode." (i.e. not in normal random, ranked, clan etc. battles.)

They are going to be a balancing nightmare that may exceed the balancing nightmare that CV's are. In things like the Halloween scenario event they should be fine but in Random, Ranked, CW they will be the new instant negative karma ship.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
561
[-SYN-]
[-SYN-]
Alpha Tester
1,185 posts
4,858 battles
13 minutes ago, nina_blain_73 said:

bad idea is a bad idea

not to mention were not fleet combatants during this time they primarily went after non warships. Others can explain it better than me . but this is flat out a bad, break this game, idea

The vast majority of IJN carriers were sunk by submarines. Akitsu Maru, Taiho, Shinano, Shokaku, Chuyo, Unryu, Shinyo, and Taiyo were all sunk by submarines and in many instances the boat in question also sunk members of her escort, such as the Tama. Submarines played a fairly major role in Battle of the Philippine Sea, Guadalcanal and Leyte Gulf. A good few of the ships represented in game were sunk by submarines, with the Kongo and the Indianapolis being the first that come to mind.

I'm personally for submarines depending on how they are implemented, and judging by the video released by Flamu I hold some cautious optimism. Players don't love/hate the idea of submarines in the game, they love/hate their preconceived conceptions of how they will be. We won't know how their inclusion might play out until we have much more concrete information and I think these threads are a little premature. It's like when the Asashio was announced and the forums broke, only to find that the ship is not the nightmare everyone was expecting.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
580
[WOLF5]
Members
1,828 posts
2,524 battles
24 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

You forgot "Sure, but only in operations or their own specific mode." (i.e. not in normal random, ranked, clan etc. battles.)

I don't think anyone would have a problem with subs in their own mode, this poll is about adding them as a full ship type, as the releases seem to indicate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[FLS]
Alpha Tester
651 posts
2,875 battles
8 minutes ago, KingCakeBaby said:

The vast majority of IJN carriers were sunk by submarines. 

Not in fleet actions.

--Helms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,572 posts
1,687 battles
15 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 

 

They are going to be a balancing nightmare that may exceed the balancing nightmare that CV's are. In things like the Halloween scenario event they should be fine but in Random, Ranked, CW they will be the new instant negative karma ship.

 

Thinking of Ranked or Clan Battles, there are going to be 5 ship types for seven spots in a game.  That is going to be ...... interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×