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

Substitute 1 CV for One Submarine per team???

60 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

519
[187]
Members
1,609 posts
8,848 battles

Not sure why the resistance to submarines but I'll throw it out there again...why have we not introduced submarines into the mix?...can it honestly make things any worse???? Can anyone honestly say that? Cap the CV's at 1 per side in the higher levels with perhaps one Submarine cap per team and see if a sub can go sink a CV perhaps tilting things even more....I say throw em in, they have already been somewhat tested why the hesitation Wargaming...?

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Confused 3
  • Boring 3
  • Angry 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
549
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
2,099 posts
6,285 battles

I don't care too much about adding submarines here anymore. On that note, a gasoline or diesel submarine does not replace a CV. Both have vastly different purposes and both are vastly different to replace one or the other on opposite teams. Only idiots CV island get sunk by CV snipers. In addition, that would also kill the "class-balance" that WG has had in the game for a while. 4 DDs for 4 DDs, 3 BBs for 3 BBs, 2 CVs for 2 CVs, etc. 1 CV for 1 SS does not at all make much sense. Assuming the submarine can even reach a CV, it may be out of its "submerge consumable" and have to shoot at the CV with it's one or two single barrel guns by which time it would've been attacked by rockets. If my (old) Ryujo can get 25 Secondary Kills total, sinking a submarine with surface guns will be no problem. Of course the submarine can attack me from underwater but that is assuming that submarine can keep up with my 28 knots underwater.

Edited by Vangm94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,091 posts
6,156 battles

SUBS probably will not show up till the end of this year at best..OR maybe it will be a Christmas present?  In a way that would be good timing as many premium X'MAS consummables could be on sale...just in time to enjoy that Holiday spirit and make your enemy mad....when they don't see it coming!   We will see....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,638
[SIM]
Members
3,841 posts
6,404 battles

Because adding such a complex and game changing class of ship to the game requires proper testing? Because doing so neccesitates entirely new weapons systems to be added? Some of you people seem to think that video game design work is easy. You also probably believe in unicorns and pixie dust. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
519
[187]
Members
1,609 posts
8,848 battles
3 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

Because adding such a complex and game changing class of ship to the game requires proper testing? Because doing so neccesitates entirely new weapons systems to be added? Some of you people seem to think that video game design work is easy. You also probably believe in unicorns and pixie dust. 

it has already been tested love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
[HEROS]
Members
1,831 posts
6,013 battles
2 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

Some of you people seem to think that video game design work is easy. You also probably believe in unicorns and pixie dust. 

yes, video game design work is easy. that's been proven hundreds of times.

unicorns are not on the list of things I've crewed on, like dragons. great sailboat.

pixie dust is real, have vacuumed several pounds of it (two daughters), and use a variety of it while restoring motorcycles (pearl, iridescence and metallic) if that's not magic, what is? radar that can see thru mountains??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,001 posts
9,104 battles
22 minutes ago, C_D said:

Not sure why the resistance to submarines but I'll throw it out there again...why have we not introduced submarines into the mix?...can it honestly make things any worse???? Can anyone honestly say that? Cap the CV's at 1 per side in the higher levels with perhaps one Submarine cap per team and see if a sub can go sink a CV perhaps tilting things even more....I say throw em in, they have already been somewhat tested why the hesitation Wargaming...?

There is no hesitation, Sub_Octavian recently told me the CV rework team will be transferred to the Submarine development team in September. They have been too busy up until now.

I suspect many of the Submarine models; are ready, and have been since last year.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
519
[187]
Members
1,609 posts
8,848 battles
Just now, LoveBote said:

There is no hesitation, Sub_Octavian recently told me the CV rework team will be transferred to the Submarine development team in September. They have been too busy up until now.

Thank you...there really needs to be the...5th Element....um chicken.

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,001 posts
9,104 battles
Just now, C_D said:

Thank you...there really needs to be the...5th Element....um chicken.

Related image

does she put salt on that bird? Subs will be full on salty submersion. 

(Can't wait personally, I love the assymetry of CVs, submarines belong to the same sadistic mindset)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,688
[ARGSY]
Members
12,932 posts
8,256 battles
15 minutes ago, C_D said:

it has already been tested love.

It's been tested to the level of exploring how players would control subs and fire weapons.

Detection and destruction of submarines by human players has not been tested AT ALL.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,346 posts
11,851 battles

The forum storm when submarines are brought into random matches will make the ongoing CV storm look like a small rain shower. Without rather extreme buffs they will be more useless than a US standard BB in a tier 7, 8, or 9 match. With those rather extreme buffs they won't be game era submarines any more.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
519
[187]
Members
1,609 posts
8,848 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

The forum storm when submarines are brought into random matches will make the ongoing CV storm look like a small rain shower. Without rather extreme buffs they will be more useless than a US standard BB in a tier 7, 8, or 9 match. With those rather extreme buffs they won't be game era submarines any more.

Your such a doomsayer dood....they have proven the mechanics of subs..WORK...they can attack and destroy surface ships. You miss the bigger picture as most do when it comes to submarines....giving players something else to hunt is critical. Just imagine if the enemy CV has a load out or plane group whateva..and is hunting a sub.,.he's not attacking the fleet...it is the spice of life....variety.

Try it sometime...

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
84 posts
3,680 battles
2 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The forum storm when submarines are brought into random matches will make the ongoing CV storm look like a small rain shower. Without rather extreme buffs they will be more useless than a US standard BB in a tier 7, 8, or 9 match. With those rather extreme buffs they won't be game era submarines any more.

I feel like they could work if they spawn near the middle of the map, or even on the red side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,688
[ARGSY]
Members
12,932 posts
8,256 battles
12 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The forum storm when submarines are brought into random matches will make the ongoing CV storm look like a small rain shower.

This much is true. Human nature as I have observed it here guarantees that outcome.

The rest, I am not so sure of. Your comparison may be off; US Standard battleships may be slow, but they can still be deadly. I think it was Soviet chess Grandmaster (and former World Champion) Vasily Smyslov who said "I may be an old lion, but if somebody puts his head in my mouth I can still bite!"

One thing is for sure - if a submarine enters a cap and (deliberately) provides a submerged sitting target, a DD must be able to find it wherever it is in the cap and kill it. Everything else gets balanced from that assumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,462
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,001 posts
9,104 battles
29 minutes ago, C_D said:

Your such a doomsayer dood....they have proven the mechanics of subs..WORK...they can attack and destroy surface ships. You miss the bigger picture as most do when it comes to submarines....giving players something else to hunt is critical. Just imagine if the enemy CV has a load out or plane group whateva..and is hunting a sub.,.he's not attacking the fleet...it is the spice of life....variety.

Try it sometime...

I agree with you. Also the entire sub development business started out on the right foot, with an accessible proof of concept PVE halloween event. If only the CV rework had taken this developmental route, much pain would have been avoided, and much goodwill retained.

I also firmly believe, introducing subs will be part of the solution to player angst over CVs. Submarines and CVs are natural enemies after all, they hard counter one another. While dd drivers won't be forgotten, they will have a new job to accomplish with depth charges and other anti sub weaponry. In the meantime, (rightly paranoid) CVs will be so busy hunting submarines, dds will get some relief from the threat of constant air attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,346 posts
11,851 battles
26 minutes ago, C_D said:

Your such a doomsayer dood....they have proven the mechanics of subs..WORK...they can attack and destroy surface ships. You miss the bigger picture as most do when it comes to submarines....giving players something else to hunt is critical. Just imagine if the enemy CV has a load out or plane group whateva..and is hunting a sub.,.he's not attacking the fleet...it is the spice of life....variety.

Try it sometime...

The mechanics did work for the steampunk fantasy era of the special mode but those subs felt nothing like subs of the games era should have felt. Slow patient ambush predators that would spend hours and even days getting into attack position.

26 minutes ago, ScottMeisterheim said:

I feel like they could work if they spawn near the middle of the map, or even on the red side.

People complain about BB's not moving up now and spawning in the middle would guarantee that they wouldn't move. Spawning them on the red side is nothing but griefing.

8 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

This much is true. Human nature as I have observed it here guarantees that outcome.

The rest, I am not so sure of. Your comparison may be off; US Standard battleships may be slow, but they can still be deadly. I think it was Soviet chess Grandmaster (and former World Champion) Vasily Smyslov who said "I may be an old lion, but if somebody puts his head in my mouth I can still bite!"

One thing is for sure - if a submarine enters a cap and (deliberately) provides a submerged sitting target, a DD must be able to find it wherever it is in the cap and kill it. Everything else gets balanced from that assumption.

True but it all depends of if the fight comes to them or goes away. If it does come to them they are tough and deadly but if it goes away they are limited to long range sniping.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
941
[SIDE]
Members
2,551 posts
1 hour ago, C_D said:

Not sure why the resistance to submarines but I'll throw it out there again...why have we not introduced submarines into the mix?...can it honestly make things any worse???? Can anyone honestly say that? Cap the CV's at 1 per side in the higher levels with perhaps one Submarine cap per team and see if a sub can go sink a CV perhaps tilting things even more....I say throw em in, they have already been somewhat tested why the hesitation Wargaming...?

Omg. No! Or try one of these.

LANGUAGE COUNTRY TRANSLATION
AFRIKAANS South Africa nee
ALBANIAN Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia jo
ALSATIAN France (Alsace) naï
ANTILLEAN CREOLE France (French Antilles) awa
ARABIC Maghreb, Near East laa
ARMENIAN Armenia, Armenian Highlands votch
AZERBAIJANI Azerbaijan, Russia (Dagestan), Iran xeyir
BASQUE Spain, France ez
BELARUSIAN Belarus Не (nie)
BENGALI Bangladesh, India na
BERBER Algeria, Mali, Niger lla
BOBO Burkina Faso, Mali aïlle
BOSNIAN Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo ne
BRETON France (Bretagne) nann
BULGARIAN Bulgaria, Turkey, Romania
BURMESE Myanmar ma hoke phu / hmar te
CATALAN Spain (Catalonia, Balearic Islands, Valencia), Andorra no
CHEROKEE USA (Oklahoma) tla / hla
CHINESE (MANDARIN) China, Taiwan, Singapore pù shi
CORSICAN France (Corse), Italy (Sardiania)
CROATIAN Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina ne
CZECH Czech Republic ne
DANISH Denmark, Germany (Southern Schleswig), Greenland, Faroe Islands nej
DUTCH Netherlands, Belgium, Suriname nee
ENGLISH UK, Ireland, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa no
ESPERANTO [constructed language] ne
ESTONIAN Estonia ei
FAROESE Faroe Islands, Denmark nei
FINNISH Finland, Sweden ei
FRENCH France, Canada (Quebec), Belgium (Wallonia), Switzerland (Romandie), Monaco, Luxembourg non
FRISIAN Netherlands, Germany nee
FRIULAN Italy (Friuli) no
GALICIAN Spain (Galicia) non
GALLO France (Brittany, Normandy) nanni
GEORGIAN Georgia ara
GERMAN Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy (South Tyrol), Belgium, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg nein
GREEK Greece, Cyprus ohi
GUARANI Paraguay nahániri
HAITIAN CREOLE Haiti non
HAWAIIAN USA (Hawaii) ʻaole
HEBREW Israel lo
HINDI India nahin
HUNGARIAN Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Serbia nem
ICELANDIC Iceland nei
IGBO Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea mba
INDONESIAN Indonesia tidak
ITALIAN Italy, San Marino, Switzerland no
JAPANESE Japan iié
KABYLE Algeria (Kabylie) ala
KHMER Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam thay
KIKONGO Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of the Congo, Angola ve
KINYARWANDA Rwanda oya
KOREAN Korea, North Korea ahneo
KURDISH Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran no / na
LAO Laos, Thailand bo
LARI Republic of the Congo kâni
LATIN Roman Kingdom - extinct minime (not at all), non (and repetition of the verb)
LATVIAN Latvia
LIGURIAN Italy (Liguria) no
LINGALA Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Central African Republic te
LITHUANIAN Lithuania ne
LOW SAXON Germany (Northern Germany), Netherlands nee
LUXEMBOURGISH Luxembourg neen
MACEDONIAN Macedonia не (ne)
MALAGASY Madagascar tsia
MALAY Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore tidak
MALTESE Malta le
MAORI New Zealand kaore
MONGOLIAN Mongolia ugui (Yгvй)
NORMAN France (Normandy) nennin / nenn
NORWEGIAN Norway nei
OCCITAN France, Spain, Italy, Monaco non
OLD NORSE Scandinavia - extinct nei
OSSETIAN Russia (North Ossetia-Alania), Georgia (South Ossetia) нæй
PAPIAMENTO Aruba, Bonaire, Curaçao no
PERSIAN (FARSI) Iran kheyr / na
POLISH Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Slovakia nie
PORTUGUESE Portugal, Brazil, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Angola, São Tomé and Príncipe não
ROMANI Romania, Europe na
ROMANIAN Romania, Moldova, Serbia, Ukraine nu
RUSSIAN Russia, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Central Asia Нет (niet)
SARDINIAN Italy (Sardinia) no
SCOTTISH GAELIC UK (Scotland) ag
SERBIAN Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro ne
SHONA Zimbabwe aiwa
SINDHI Pakistan (Sindh) na
SINHALESE Sri Lanka nae
SLOVAK Slovakia nie
SLOVENE Slovenia, Italy, Austria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia ne
SOBOTA Slovenia ne
SONINKE Mali, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Gambia, Mauritania, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Ghana
SPANISH Spain, Hispanic America, Equatorial Guinea no
SWAHILI Tanzania, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Uganda siyo / hapana
SWEDISH Sweden, Finland nej
TAGALOG Philippines hindi (po)
TAHITIAN France (Society Islands) aita
TAMIL India, Sri Lanka illaï
TATAR Russia (Tatarstan) yuk
TELUGU India (Andhra Pradesh, Telangana) kadhu
THAI Thailand ไม่ (maï) / ไม่ใช่ (maï chaï)
TURKISH Turkey, Cyprus, Greece hayir
UDMURT Russia (Udmurtia) oevoel (with nouns) / ug(with verbs)
UKRAINIAN Ukraine Ні (ni)
URDU Pakistan, India نهين (nahin)
WALLOON ("betchfessîs" spelling) Belgium neni
WELSH UK (Wales) nage
WOLOF Senegal, Gambia, Mauritania déedéet
YIDDISH Central, Eastern and Western Europe, Israel, North America nein
YORUBA Nigeria, Benin rara
ZULU South Africa cha

 

 

 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[OKM]
Members
435 posts
3,128 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

The forum storm when submarines are brought into random matches will make the ongoing CV storm look like a small rain shower. Without rather extreme buffs they will be more useless than a US standard BB in a tier 7, 8, or 9 match. With those rather extreme buffs they won't be game era submarines any more. 

Well, the game era is kinda already quite elastic. The Colbert is a 1957 ship after all.

 

And I do not see them needing that much boost for higher tier.  The I-201 was able to go at 19 knt under water with 4 long lance lancer in the front. The balance may be tricky, but I do think that they can make it work. Well, it's easier to justify it than the Akizuki ''anti AA DD that became a daka daka DD''.

Share this post


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

Would be interesting if WG could raise the team size. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,346 posts
11,851 battles
1 minute ago, Y_Nagato said:

Well, the game era is kinda already quite elastic. The Colbert is a 1957 ship after all.

 

And I do not see them needing that much boost for higher tier.  The I-201 was able to go at 19 knt under water with 4 long lance lancer in the front. The balance may be tricky, but I do think that they can make it work. Well, it's easier to justify it than the Akizuki ''anti AA DD that became a daka daka DD''.

How long could the I-201 go 19 knots while submerged? Going from the max range data of (Submerged: 135 nmi (250 km) at 3 knots (5.6 km/h)) in the Wiki not very long. When hunting even modern hunter-killer subs go slow to stay undetected which defines my problem with what I saw with those event subs, they didn't act like subs and instead acted like slow DD's with a short immunity shield. The event also failed to address what larger ships would do when facing a sub. The standard answer is that DD's are supposed to deal with the subs but what happens when there is no sub?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[B_Y_F]
Members
386 posts
9,074 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

The mechanics did work for the steampunk fantasy era of the special mode but those subs felt nothing like subs of the games era should have felt. Slow patient ambush predators that would spend hours and even days getting into attack position.

People complain about BB's not moving up now and spawning in the middle would guarantee that they wouldn't move. Spawning them on the red side is nothing but griefing.

True but it all depends of if the fight comes to them or goes away. If it does come to them they are tough and deadly but if it goes away they are limited to long range sniping.

WOWS already buff all ships speed 5 times compared to their real world speed (wows kt) to let them doge torpedoes and gun shells so I can't see subs as problematic as you imagined.  

you are right for the last point.  Based on my sub experience, we wait, we never trace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
941
[SIDE]
Members
2,551 posts
35 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

Well, the game era is kinda already quite elastic. The Colbert is a 1957 ship after all.

 

And I do not see them needing that much boost for higher tier.  The I-201 was able to go at 19 knt under water with 4 long lance lancer in the front. The balance may be tricky, but I do think that they can make it work. Well, it's easier to justify it than the Akizuki ''anti AA DD that became a daka daka DD''.

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,539
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
21,346 posts
11,851 battles
1 minute ago, sapient007 said:

WOWS already buff all ships speed 5 times compared to their real world speed (wows kt) to let them doge torpedoes and gun shells so I can't see subs as problematic as you imagined.  

you are right for the last point.  Based on my sub experience, we wait, we never trace. 

True but ship movement is in relation to the other ships. I am talking about buffing far beyond what is built into the scale of the game where subs would be faster than the surface ships. If sub speeds are in relation to the surface ships they are not going to be very popular. Also for most of the games era they had no IFF ability so any submerged sub that was unexpectedly found would be treated as an enemy sub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[OKM]
Members
435 posts
3,128 battles
18 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

How long could the I-201 go 19 knots while submerged? Going from the max range data of (Submerged: 135 nmi (250 km) at 3 knots (5.6 km/h)) in the Wiki not very long. When hunting even modern hunter-killer subs go slow to stay undetected which defines my problem with what I saw with those event subs, they didn't act like subs and instead acted like slow DD's with a short immunity shield. The event also failed to address what larger ships would do when facing a sub. The standard answer is that DD's are supposed to deal with the subs but what happens when there is no sub?

Well, in that regard WOWS already is quite the arcade game, where DD can reload torpedo and BB have high accuracy. And the issue about who can hurt them is not really a problem. Sure, DD are the main treat, but CV are also a decent counter and many cruiser were equipped with dept charge (for instance, the Crown Class Colony of the RN was fitted with dept charge, just like almost all British cruiser). German heavy cruiser and some of their Battleship had some depth charge launcher (for other reason, but can still be easily use for that without hurting that much the accuracy). Even some heavy IJN cruiser, like Maya of the Takao class, were fitted with some dept charge launcher.

Edited by Y_Nagato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[SAVAG]
[SAVAG]
Members
517 posts

Adding subs means . In no perticular order.

Ships will have to have new mechanics introduced on them  .

Depth charges added on most destroyers and some crusiers. They are already modeled on most ships ingame.

Maybe even adding depth charges to planes.

Adding selectable depth to the charges before firing .This could be automatic if sub is detected .

Adding visuals to all ships and aircraft  with said mechanics .

Testing and retesting those mechanics .

Subs would have to be sped up x4 or 5 times their normal operational speed. That or be constrained to small maps . Which isn't gonna happen on higher tiers.

If WG does it right. It will be awesome . If they do happen to pull a CV rework style introduction ......Well we know how that's going .

We shall see what the future holds .

:Smile_popcorn:

Edited by Versili

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×