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

Dev Blog: Subs are here

787 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

8,225
[INTEL]
Members
12,125 posts
33,637 battles

ST, submarines.

Back in 2018 many of you have participated in the operation called 'Terror of the Deep'. This event allowed everyone to try a new class in our game — submarines. By the end of the event, it became clear that our players are highly interested in submarines and we should be engaged in full development.

And now, we are happy to announce that the first stages of closed testing will begin shortly, where the new gameplay of submarines will be tested. The American and German submarines will be the pioneers of the new class.

After the SuperTest submarines will be available for players to try on a special server, before being added to the main game client. Once introduced, the new class will initially be available in a special separate battle type only and this final configuration stage will last for several months. This will allow us to make additional changes to the new class under the conditions of the live server.

We will be sharing more details with you shortly. Follow our official game channels for more news!

+++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Edited by Taichunger
  • Cool 10
  • Angry 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles

I think you meant "Dev BLOG", Tai. :Smile_teethhappy:

I appreciate the fact they're making every effort to do extended, continuous public testing outside the regular gameplay modes.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,225
[INTEL]
Members
12,125 posts
33,637 battles
Just now, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I think you meant "Dev BLOG", Tai. :Smile_teethhappy:

I appreciate the fact they're making every effort to do extended, continuous public testing outside the regular gameplay modes.

Indeed. They seemed to have learned from their brilliant handling of the CV Rebork. 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
247
[WOLF5]
Beta Testers
687 posts
3,696 battles

I don't think the forum is ready for that level of salt to be added to the ongoing CV crisis...

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
117
[DRAH]
Members
293 posts
7,913 battles

my personal prediction is that they will remain in the fenced off mode for over a year as they try and fail to make Anti Sub Warfare even remotely fun.

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
769
[USCC]
Members
2,755 posts
12,006 battles

I can see so many changes to the ships we already have in game just to be able to tackle the job of hunting and sinking a sub.
Changes that will surely be made over and over and over again.

Are subs really needed in this game?

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles
7 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

Indeed. They seemed to have learned from their brilliant handling of the CV Rebork. 

They were caught between a rock and a hard place with carriers. They had to change over eventually; if they'd put them off to the side as they're doing with subs, nobody who mattered would ever have played them and they'd have got no meaningful balance data. IIRC carriers were in the game from the start; they weren't just going to pull them out for an indefinite period.

On the other hand, subs are a completely new thing requiring new weapons and possibly new sensors/consumables to deal with. Best to have them separate for a while.

2 minutes ago, SpudZero said:

I can see so many changes to the ships we already have in game just to be able to tackle the job of hunting and sinking a sub.
Changes that will surely be made over and over and over again.

That's why the parallel test mode has openly been declared as being planned to be of several MONTHS duration. I only hope WG has the sense to make it valid for at least some directives.

If we had to do it now, I see a combination of hydro and RPF as being the way to go; get on top of it, wait until it's forced to come up for air, and then either shoot it, torpedo it or ram it. But let's see what they plan to do. I foresee a zone of influence around a DD that is constantly active for submerged submarines only.

  • Cool 4
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
769
[USCC]
Members
2,755 posts
12,006 battles
3 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

That's why the parallel test mode has openly been declared as being planned to be of several MONTHS duration. I only hope WG has the sense to make it valid for at least some directives.

If we had to do it now, I see a combination of hydro and RPF as being the way to go; get on top of it, wait until it's forced to come up for air, and then either shoot it, torpedo it or ram it. But let's see what they plan to do. I foresee a zone of influence around a DD that is constantly active for submerged submarines only.

I understand, and I'm not opposed to them at all, however I feel they'd be best kept to their own mode indefinitely. 
This would allow them to be in the game, but not to unbalance the game any more than it already is in many cases.

  • Cool 10
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[ADR]
[ADR]
Members
173 posts
6 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I foresee a zone of influence around a DD that is constantly active for submerged submarines only.

That actually what I'm kind of afraid of, that they'll decide only DDs can find or attack submarines.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles
Just now, SpudZero said:

I feel they'd be best kept to their own mode indefinitely. 

I understand how you feel and why, but for the meantime let us be thankful for small mercies. :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
117
[DRAH]
Members
293 posts
7,913 battles

They may also have to provide BBs and CAs with a bonus secondary accuracy buff against subs. In fact how heavy ships are supposed to fight against subs is one of the things I am most interested in. It is all very well saying "historical reality says they can't" but just like the sub proponents won't accept historical speed they will also have to accept some kind of Anti Sub capacity being added to the big ships.

One thing that is very clear is that given turret traverse times that the gunfire option is not viable if subs do not have to stay surfaced for over 30 secs once out of air. The rapid porposing of the Halloween missions last year made gunfire against subs impossible as the periscope is just too small to hit with guns. This isn't world of tanks where you can snipe a commanders hatch.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
769
[USCC]
Members
2,755 posts
12,006 battles
40 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I understand how you feel and why, but for the meantime let us be thankful for small mercies. :Smile_trollface:

lol you got that right, TY WG!

 

Depth charges should be fun! 

Spoiler

c5093d2343f3e2a82f76ad0666f1ac02.jpg.0e21008bf9d7737b7c17b512a82d9a13.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles
2 minutes ago, Ellyh said:

The rapid porposing of the Halloween missions last year made gunfire against subs impossible as the periscope is just too small to hit with guns.

Given the uncanny accuracy of which bots are capable at the worst possible times, this was necessary to give the players half a chance. Still, that was no more than a test vehicle for the concept and the ship and weapon controls; Halloween has always been its own peculiar beast (pun intended).

We'll see how this gets settled in the regular historical, non-spooky mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

I might actually re-install when this goes live (If I'm not still distracted by other games like MechWarrior or Borderlands).

As far as ASW goes, I suspect it will work akin to the way torps do now; just a 3rd weapon system for Destroyers and appropriately equipped Cruisers (a number of them, especially mid tier Soviet Cruisers, have either the racks or the launching lanes for DC's) and a painted 'zone' of effect is where they will drop around the ship. How depth is set, I would wager, will be related to the depth 'zones' from the Halloween event.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles
2 minutes ago, SpudZero said:

Depth charges should be fun! 

It'll be interesting to see how they work. I know of a novel in which a DD captain tries to depth-charge a Japanese destroyer by setting them for minimum depth so that the concussion breaks its back and basically shakes it to death, but he gets in so close that the throwers would have put the charges on the target's deck to no effect. Not sure we'll get that option here! :Smile_izmena:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
117
[DRAH]
Members
293 posts
7,913 battles
4 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

I might actually re-install when this goes live (If I'm not still distracted by other games like MechWarrior or Borderlands).

As far as ASW goes, I suspect it will work akin to the way torps do now; just a 3rd weapon system for Destroyers and appropriately equipped Cruisers (a number of them, especially mid tier Soviet Cruisers, have either the racks or the launching lanes for DC's) and a painted 'zone' of effect is where they will drop around the ship. How depth is set, I would wager, will be related to the depth 'zones' from the Halloween event.

I disagree, just like Anti Air all ships need some form of ASW. While a handful of premium ships having no anti air at tiers 2 and 3 is manageable the majority of the player base who prefer BBs (most popular ship type since the game launched) need some kind of protection from and ability to damage submarines or the game will surely fail.

EDIT: Even if this is automated like secondaries and AA are now these ships MUST have some way of fighting back against subs. Otherwise they should just declare any PvP match lost when your last DD sinks if the enemy still has a sub.

Edited by Ellyh
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,601
[5D2]
Supertester
2,299 posts
22,248 battles
16 minutes ago, Ellyh said:

They may also have to provide BBs and CAs with a bonus secondary accuracy buff against subs. In fact how heavy ships are supposed to fight against subs is one of the things I am most interested in. It is all very well saying "historical reality says they can't" but just like the sub proponents won't accept historical speed they will also have to accept some kind of Anti Sub capacity being added to the big ships.

One thing that is very clear is that given turret traverse times that the gunfire option is not viable if subs do not have to stay surfaced for over 30 secs once out of air. The rapid porposing of the Halloween missions last year made gunfire against subs impossible as the periscope is just too small to hit with guns. This isn't world of tanks where you can snipe a commanders hatch.

It's going to be a mess and all the "no counter play" [edited] from CVs is just going to be echoed again.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,225
[INTEL]
Members
12,125 posts
33,637 battles
5 minutes ago, Ellyh said:

Otherwise they should just declare any PvP match lost when your last DD sinks if the enemy still has a sub.

Q:  what are you doing, mate?

A: Oh, just getting in my sub to farm Solo Warriors.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
Just now, yashma said:

 

Anyone who doubted/didn't see this coming was willfully and deliberately ignorant to the obvious. Not only was a 5th class needed for balance (read: it doesn't automatically FIX everything, but it makes the process of fixing thing infinity easier), given Wargaming's business model, subs represent just TOO potent of a market. Submarines have long been a staple of PC and Video Gaming in general, with the number of Submarine centered/focused games *FAR* outstripping Surface Combat games (since WoWs release, there has been *2* surface warship games, and *5* Submarine games for example), with long-standing dedicated communities around Submarine games (most noticeably the Silent Hunter Series although Cold Waters is getting deserved attention as well thanks to it being open to modding), thus from a sales perspective and market analysis, it is a market that *already* exists, and has data and projections associated with it. Likewise their preference for 'odd ball' or 'famous' premiums, Submarines are an almost more potent source than surface warships, whereas even odd arberations to 'normal' surface ships like the Atlanta being technically a CL despite having a massive array of DD guns, is still more conventional than say the Cruiser Submarines like the M Class or the Nautilus nuclear powered boat (which I would be shocked if that isn't either the outright American T10 or an eventual Premium T10; bearing in mind that the Nautilus is, from a combat perspective of a short term battle, not much stronger than a Type XXI with frankly less weapons (no AA guns) and worse handling (it was not optimized for Surfacing and Submerging speeds).

There was no way that they were going to enter Q3/Q4 of 2019 and Q1 2020 without subs at least being concertedly worked on. Not with competition reaching a pitch.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2
  • Angry 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
221
[-K-]
[-K-]
Supertester
922 posts
11,192 battles

As long as when subs detonate there is a huge explosion of water coming up, then that will be fun and engaging!

BB AP to hit subs under water should be a thing too! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,177
[PVE]
Members
10,998 posts
20,892 battles
Quote

Back in 2018 many of you have participated in the operation called 'Terror of the Deep'. This event allowed everyone to try a new class in our game — submarines. By the end of the event, it became clear that our players are highly interested in submarines and we should be engaged in full development.

I have never seen a more delusional set of folks than those that helm WG. 1st of all the MAJORITY of posts about subs are negative as in DON'T DO IT! And second of all people liking a special event that is totally different than standard game play does NOT mean hey add those to regular play. I clearly remember people saying it was ok/fun for the event but it would not work well and not be fun in a regular game.

But WG will do as WG wants and make things up and lie to themselves and us if needed to justify it.

They clearly have not learned their lesson from the CV Rebork and NTC/RB disasters.

Edited by AdmiralThunder
  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,746
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
3,981 posts
5,499 battles

giphy.gif

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,651
[ARGSY]
Members
17,473 posts
12,140 battles
1 minute ago, AdmiralThunder said:

They clearly have not learned their lesson from the CV Rebork and NTC/RB disasters.

Except they have learned, because this time they're going to keep these things corralled in their own little space for MONTHS while we play with them at will and help WG sort out the problems. You can flip the tables all you want, but this time they're doing it right. And it's that quarantine factor which has me unequivocally excited to hear exactly what's coming down the pipeline.

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×