Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
n00bot

Can Subs Fix Destroyers?

100 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

453
[90TH]
Members
984 posts
9,232 battles

Do Battleships have a clear role in the game?  Easy yes!  Cruisers?  Carriers?  Yes and yes.  Destroyers?  Highly debatable, one of the hottest forum topics especially with more carriers in the game now. You need AA bubbles to secure a cap, so capping is now best done by stealthy AA cruisers.  The role of spotting is easy in a plane that can fly 176 knots “through” mountains, leaving destroyers with the fleet role of... staying alive?

Enter subs.  Being able to hide from aircraft by submersion, and get close enough for torps to work again, they can take the old DD roles back and become a threat again. Of course that will necessitate counter-sub play which of course would be the strength of “new destroyers,” depth charges and such.

Could subs be the solution to the destroyer’s existential crisis?

Edited by n00bot
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[CUTE]
Beta Testers
461 posts
4,906 battles

No, subs would just make it worse by further infringing on the role of a DD, and giving DDs something to super hard counter doesn’t fix the problem, that they’re currently super hard countered by CVs, either.

 

Theyd also probably be known as “sea cancer” within a week, to compliment the sky cancer.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,342 posts
11,846 battles
2 minutes ago, PG908 said:

No, subs would just make it worse. 

 

Theyd also probably be known as “sea cancer” within a week, to compliment the sky cancer.

They are going to be a nightmare to balance and with the amount of buffing to their speed that will be required they will not be anything like the subs of the era the game covers.

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,342 posts
11,846 battles
1 minute ago, HazardDrake said:

Can Gasoline fix a dumpster fire?

Yes, if your objective is a conflagration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,669
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
7,526 posts
8 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

They are going to be a nightmare to balance and with the amount of buffing to their speed that will be required they will not be anything like the subs of the era the game covers.

 

7 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

Can Gasoline fix a dumpster fire?

 

5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Yes, if your objective is a conflagration.

Pretty much all of that.

Subs do not belong in the sort of game WOWS is, and really won't work with WOWS in particular.

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[CUTE]
Beta Testers
461 posts
4,906 battles
6 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

They are going to be a nightmare to balance and with the amount of buffing to their speed that will be required they will not be anything like the subs of the era the game covers.

Yeah, the power game between subs quite frankly isn’t as large as other ships within a class, and the power gap between a sub and a dd is more than between a DD and a BB.

They also don’t bring anything to the table that an extra stealthy DD can’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
900 posts
3,912 battles

Fix as in finish off destroying the game, then yes.  They have to balance what we have with surface and sky before they EVEN THINK about adding the sub-surface layer into the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,637 posts
3,938 battles

How I see it assuming CV remain really popular, if given a 30km top speed Subs would potentially replace DDs as early game cappers and maybe spotting but getting in a good position to spot without getting spotted in return would take a while. 

 

They would make German and British DDs stronger though because hydro.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
900 posts
3,912 battles

Sorry for the double post but how would DDs hunt subs if they cant move alone?  The whole deathball fleet is going to have to squeeze in behind the DD while he is sub hunting?  LoL...sounds like something out of a Monty Python movie.

It would be amusing for a cap to start ticking which normally means DD and the CV starts drooling about their next meal and they zoom over to the cap to realize nobody is there because it's a sub capping from underneath...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,852
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
8,815 posts
12,548 battles

Subs would give DD's and probably Light Cruisers something else to do. And Might even free up DD's to not have to do some things they do currently. 

Having said that I do not think there is anything broken with DD's for Subs to fix. 

Subs will just add an even greater depth to the game. 

Honestly can't wait. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,830
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
11,409 posts
16,809 battles
36 minutes ago, n00bot said:

Could subs be the solution to the destroyer’s existential crisis?

Rather just remove CVs.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,799
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,674 posts
8,265 battles

The only way subs could fix DDs is if subs took over the role of stealth torpedo attacks and DDs adopted the role of anti torpedo escorts. Of course that would leave IJN DDs without a role since their ASW ability would be mediocre at best and they are built around torpedo attacks currently.

 

This all assumes that people who play DDs for the stealth torpedo attack role would be fine adopting subs instead, which is guaranteed to not be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
122
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
971 posts
6,664 battles
30 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Yes, if your objective is a conflagration.

Well since WG is good at spamming radar and CV's I assume they want a conflagration, so why bot subs as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
1,638 posts
5,415 battles
6 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Rather just remove CVs.

I'm not a fan of subs but they fit 1000% better into the game than CVs.  I think they'd mostly be a big gimmick much like the assashios of the world.  They certainly wouldn't impact the game nearly as much as CVs do. edit: and yes removing cvs also would fix DDs.  Subs not so much.

Edited by CommodoreKang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
641
[CVA16]
Members
3,651 posts
11,939 battles
23 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Rather just remove CVs.

Nice to have a dream, but WG will never admit they made that big a mistake. Just keep slapping on a new coat of paint and say "See, All fixed"

With all the vitriol that CVs bring, WG could allow the oft mentioned "NO CV"  random battle button. Just put some parameters:

1. It will take longer to load into battle as you drop in MM priority as it trys to create battles to put the excess CVs in (unless most of the players hit the button, which is what could happen)

2. Put a penalty on getting special matchmaking, say 10-20% reduced earnings (credits and XP)

3. Make it so CV players can't opt out when they play other classes. If you have played a CV in randoms in the last 30 games (40? 50?) your button will be grayed out.

Another dream that  will never happen because WG realizes CVs would be in a pool with only other CV players (which seems fine to me).

Edited by Sabot_100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
379
[UEFN]
Members
970 posts
17,538 battles

We need more carriers to counter carriers, 3 to 4 CV per side....problem solved.  :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
775
[S-N-D]
Members
2,456 posts
6,785 battles
42 minutes ago, T_O_dubl_D said:

Fix as in finish off destroying the game, then yes.  They have to balance what we have with surface and sky before they EVEN THINK about adding the sub-surface layer into the game.

If by balance you mean make DDs equal the larger ships in game in terms of average anything, it will never happen. Torpedoes are too luck based and the small hit point pool make it difficult. So leave the DDs to the more competent veterans. DDs are not greenhorn friendly and never will be.

Edited by _Caliph_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,120
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
6,150 posts
9,473 battles

the only thing DDs would have over subs is speed, because subs would obviously be more stealthy from being much smaller and being able to submerge

Edited by tcbaker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,799
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,674 posts
8,265 battles
1 minute ago, tcbaker777 said:

the only thing DDs would have over subs is speed

Maybe not if the Halloween mode is anything like WGs vision for subs. On the other hand DDs do get more torpedoes to launch per salvo, more guns, and more hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
641
[CVA16]
Members
3,651 posts
11,939 battles
1 minute ago, tcbaker777 said:

the only thing DDs would have over subs is speed

And guns. Not likely to be a gunboat sub although its all up to WG whims. Submarine Akitsuki anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
625
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
1,638 posts
5,415 battles
11 minutes ago, Sabot_100 said:

Nice to have a dream, but WG will never admit they made that big a mistake. Just keep slapping on a new coat of paint and say "See, All fixed"

With all the vitriol that CVs bring, WG could allow the oft mentioned "NO CV"  random battle button. Just put some parameters:

1. It will take longer to load into battle as you drop in MM priority as it trys to create battles to put the excess CVs in (unless most of the players hit the button, which is what could happen)

2. Put a penalty on getting special matchmaking, say 10-20% reduced earnings (credits and XP)

3. Make it so CV players can't opt out when they play other classes. If you have played a CV in randoms in the last 30 games (40? 50?) your button will be grayed out.

Another dream that  will never happen because WG realizes CVs would be in a pool with only other CV players (which seems fine to me).

I like the way you think.   They could also charge some ridiculous price that I'd probably pay too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SYN]
Members
897 posts
8,438 battles
1 hour ago, n00bot said:

The role of spotting is easy in a plane that can fly 176 knots

In games with 4 CVs and 4 DDs, I can still track over 100 k in spotting and push the red team away from caps with vision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×