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

There willl be no subs in random or competitive

98 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
2,599 posts
7,629 battles
6 hours ago, Umikami said:

Yes, and after the player base outcry, how do the CV players like them? Like giving them a baseball bat that's broken and yelling "PLAY BALL!"

As a CV player, I say, "Yep.  That's pretty much how it is."
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,645
[WOLF3]
Members
23,745 posts
21,161 battles
6 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

Even without that specification, I am 100% certain subs will be in Randoms eventually purely because the main motivation for this is to add a 5th set of premiums to be sold, and it becomes MUCH harder to justify a purchase if it doesn't work in the, you know, MAIN mode. Imagine if they sold a ship that only worked in Raptor Rescue; not even the other T6 Ops; just that ONE op. Sure some would buy it, but likely barely, if even, enough to cover the investment.

There's money to be made here.

Wehraboos want their U-Boats.

US would like their subs like Gato-class.

Weebs want their IJN subs (I-400, I-58 to say "Hi!" to Indianapolis, etc).

Etc.

 

Ships you can't use for the mode of play most people do, RANDOMS, defeats the purpose for guys to get these ships to begin with.  Why would I get a ship I can't use in the mode of plays I spend my time with?  Why would I spend money on some, for example, High Tier Premium Submarine, if I can't use it in the mode of play I am in most of the time?

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,530
[CRMSN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,956 posts
4,352 battles
6 hours ago, yacskn said:

I don't mind them introducing new classes, but I do mind it when they introduce a whole host of balancing issues when even the 3-class-system isn't properly balanced, not even gonna mention the CVs.

I mean just look at the CBs and Ranked going on right now; both tiers have such weak cruisers that the meta is entirely skewed towards gunboats.

Balance the tiers first, then balance the CV. Only then start daydreaming about a new class.
This is like trying to fight a house fire before you extinguish yourself.

Is this really a problem? 

We have just gone through a bunch of seasons were Cruisers were the kings of Clan wars, DD's were basically relegated to a spotting / token role with not much to do. 

Many CC's have outright stated that destroyers are bloody boring in clan wars at tier 10.. No one thought about doing anything about it for the last 3 years..  Now that DD's actually have an active role you want to revisit the dynamic? 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,631
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
3,773 posts
5,275 battles

Sure there won't.   WG is going to introduce a class that no one will feel any need to grind for or purchase premiums.....Very likely.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,167
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
1 minute ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

There's money to be made here.

Wehraboos want their U-Boats.

US would like their subs like Gato-class.

Weebs want their IJN subs (I-400, I-58 to say "Hi!" to Indianapolis, etc).

To say nothing of tie ins; there are far more preserved subs than Destroyers (there's actually paltry FEW WWII/WWI era destroyers preserved) and that allows for FAR more tie in content (videos, tours, trips, ect), and outright premiums. To say nothing of the unique specialty designs like the much desired Surcouf or in my case the M1 (RN 12" gunned Cruiser Submarine). I'd even strongly argue that the Nautilus is a valid T10 Premium/Line ship, as it's 'unlimited' dive time would be balanced by it's relatively light armament (only 6 forward tubes), below average submerged speeds, and insanely long surfacing and submerging times, forcing it to run on the surface to its targets and taking a great deal of time to become 'safe' underwater to set up torp runs.

2 minutes ago, Cobraclutch said:

Is this really a problem? 

We have just gone through a bunch of seasons were Cruisers were the kings of Clan wars, DD's were basically relegated to a spotting / token role with not much to do. 

Many CC's have outright stated that destroyers are bloody boring in clan wars at tier 10.. No one thought about doing anything about it for the last 3 years..  Now that DD's actually have an active role you want to revisit the dynamic? 

You cannot balance an inherently broken system. Imagine you have a teeter totter, but the fulcrum is too flat on it's top surface. Before you can dial in the right weights and distances, i.e. balance, you must first ensure that the *foundation* is functional. An RPS model is *inherently* broken with an even number of classes. Before they can even ATTEMPT to balance them correctly, they need to either remove or add a class. Clearly, they are opting for the later. Subs themselves will not fix anything, or if they do, not much, however, they create a situation where balancing CAN be done as the inherent imbalance is removed. Right now instead of all ships having an even number of counters/counter, you have DD's with sorta 1.5 counters, CA/CL's for sure, and CV's sorta? BB's with sorta 0.6 counters, DD's kinda and CV's kinda. CA/CL's only have 1 counter overall, BB's. And CV's, do they actually have a direct counter? Sorta CA/CL's but sorta BB's?

See it is inherently broken. Meanwhile if you have 5 classes you can ensure every class counters two, and is countered BY two. This is a fundamental mathematical necessity to how balance works.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[FOG]
Members
698 posts
6,757 battles
8 hours ago, Herr_Reitz said:

I'm gonna play the poodoo out of subs when they land. Then when they lock em down, well after that, what's left? Nukes? Rockets? 

No wait... I know... PT boats! 

I have seriously wondered about PT boats as well.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[FOG]
Members
698 posts
6,757 battles
8 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

See it is inherently broken. Meanwhile if you have 5 classes you can ensure every class counters two, and is countered BY two. This is a fundamental mathematical necessity to how balance works.

Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock..... 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,645
[WOLF3]
Members
23,745 posts
21,161 battles
2 minutes ago, DJC_499 said:

I have seriously wondered about PT boats as well.....

There are PT Boat-like craft in the game, albeit we can't play them.  They are in PVE, "Operation Dynamo" for the Dunkirk evacuation.  Players can only use DDs.  We faced nothing but lots of German aircraft and tons of low detection Schnellboots.

German E-Boat S 204 surrenders at Felixstowe on 13 May 1945.jpg

Taken from Wikipedia's entry for German E-Boats.

4x 533mm torpedoes for 2 tubes.

20mm x3 cannons.

37mm x1 cannon.

 

Compare that to PT-109, the boat future president JFK was Commanding.

 

We were slaughtering Schnellboots with our DDs, but then again, destroying such craft were the primary reason Destroyers came about to begin with :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,599 posts
7,629 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Normandie.  The class was designed for 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWs, she goes a blazing fast 29.5kts.  All while New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, WV'41 are stuck at 21kts "because it's realistic."

Bayern.  The class was at 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWS, she goes 25kts.

Konig.  The speed was at... guess what?... 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWS, she goes 24kts.  Just because.  While New York is at her historical 21kts.

Crazy speeds they were never designed for, never attained, while USN BBs in mid and low tiers are stuck to "realistic" speeds.

So, the solution is to revise all ships/planes/subs to their historical specifications?

I would like to try that.

One might get a better sense of the features, quirks, and cons of every Nationality in the tech-tree.

Also, that would mean revisions to the main battery ranges along with other ordnance characteristics.  :-)

Enclosed is a photo taken while visiting the USS Massachusetts, during the Anchors Away Tour.

How Far Could The Guns Fire_06-15-2019_.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,622
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,032 posts
7 hours ago, Umikami said:

Yes, and after the player base outcry, how do the CV players like them? Like giving them a baseball bat that's broken and yelling "PLAY BALL!"

I like CVs very much.  I think the AA is a bit nuts right now, but there are some adjustments coming next patch.

I think subs could also be fun.  We don't know what they will really be yet, all we know is "subs are coming".  They could be great, they could be really bad, we don't know yet. 

If I think they are bad when we actually get to see what WG has been working on, I will say so.  If I think they are great, I will unlock them all and buy some of the premiums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,479
[KRAK]
Members
3,471 posts
19,387 battles
8 hours ago, Wows_Nightly_News said:

I was just thinking about how the "national flavors" will affect subs. Imagine the Russians with a 50mm hull and radar.

You forgot homing torpedos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
313
Beta Testers
819 posts
10,005 battles
11 hours ago, Chain_shot said:

Have any of you actually looked at WWII subs or post war till about 1950?

 

In  general ....

Look at the general specs of all nations subs.

Highest speed attained is 21 knots on the surface.

torpedo distance of 4 kilometers/9000 yards max.

Underwater max speed for subs is 8 knots. - IJN did have one that went about 21 knots max.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specifications_of_submarines_of_World_War_II

 

They won't be implemented unless there is fudging of the specs at a massive level.

 

So what else can you do with them ? - Maybe have them play against each other since even a basic Orlan can run them down and spank em.  So if we get subs it won't be in randoms because they can't work. they could have 200% stealth and would still be run down by the crappiest of ships.

 

All you girlie men are getting you panties all wet and twisted for no reason at this time.:cap_popcorn:

Yet we have BBs that heal.... DDs that can burn a cruiser down in 90 seconds, Cvs that are immune to 5 inch shells, 400 torpdeoes on board, and all ships have an insta repair.

Where exactly is the realism line that cant be crossed for balance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,826
[YORHA]
Members
4,666 posts
9,064 battles

There won't be any subs in the game because we all know the Russian BB Kremlin killed them all in WWII.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,167
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
2 hours ago, DJC_499 said:

Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock..... 

But there are no 4 weapon versions if you notice, because they don't work. There's a fantastic paper on the subject here:

http://www.math.grinnell.edu/~chamberl/papers/rps.pdf
The basic gist is that in order for the rings to be balanced, there must be an ODD number of weapons, never even, and as such, *this* game, which has been established at least by design to be RPS based, is INHERENTLY broken with only 4 classes. It either needs to remove one, or gain one.

Quote


Mathematically, this game is referred to as abalanced tournament: withan odd numbernof weapons, each weapon beats (n1)/2 weapons and losesto the same number. This mutual dominance/submission connects RPS(3)with a seemingly disparate object: Borromean rings.

An oft-noted property of the standard three Borromean ringsis that re-moving any one ring frees the other two. This is an example of aBrunnianlink, that is, a link where removing any one component frees all the othercomponents. In the five-ring case, removing any one ring doesnot unlink theothers. However, sometimes removing two rings does the trick. A carefulanalysis reveals that if two random rings are removed, thereis a 50% chance that the remaining three rings are freed. From this perspective, a new, fairtwo-player game could involve each player simultaneously removing a ring.If they have chosen distinct rings and they all fall apart, Player 1 wins,otherwise Player 2 wins Suppose now that one has seven weapons in a two-player game with eachweapon beating three others and losing to the remaining three. We referto this as RPS(7). Unlike RPS(3) and RPS(5), we will see that there arenon-isomorphic RPS(7) games.In computing the 7×7 balanced matrices, we also compute their char-acteristic polynomials, since matrices that are permutation similar have thesame characteristic polynomial, although not conversely.We find only threedistinct characteristic polynomials, and a further analysis shows that all 7×7balanced matrices with the same characteristic polynomials are permutationsimilar. So there are exactly three non-isomorphic RPS(7) games.As in the RPS(5) case, we seek the automorphism groups of eachof thethree cases. To this end, we produce representative graphs whose symmetriesmake their automorphism groups nearly transparent; see Figure 7. We referto the three graphs as the ThreeSeptagons, the HexagonalPyramid, and theFanoPlane. The HexagonalPyramid gains its name by imagining the seventhvertex as positioned above the center of the hexagon.

 

 

Edited by _RC1138
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,018
[-K-]
Members
7,674 posts
12,620 battles
4 hours ago, _RC1138 said:

IKR? There will 100% be subs in both randoms and competitive. And I'll give you the simple reason why: the players who START playing WoWs because of Subs, who PURCHASE the inevitable multitude of PREMIUM subs, will *DEMAND* it. If you consider the wider gaming community, Sub gamers are far more common than say, Destroyer or Battleship or Cruiser gamers (there aren't that many games with those units) and so it will not be like CV's where all of the 10 of them demanding to be treated equally for Competitive modes falls on death ears; there are PLENTY of Submarine gamers who will demand that and enough buying power behind them to ensure that is the case.

Just wait for the prerequisite OP Premium sub as the magic dangling carrot, just like there are for all the other classes - Gremyashchy (DD), Belfast (CL), and Nikolai (BB).

This also begs the question on how surface ships will have to be modified (ie: depth charges) to combat subs, as well as if 12v12 gameplay includes submarines, or if the game size will become larger to accomodate (14v14?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
942
[RELAX]
Members
1,163 posts
8,654 battles

Creatively squired from another thread but it says it all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
252
[AAYC]
Beta Testers
781 posts
10,479 battles

People hated open water invisible firing and you don't think they wont hate something that just pops up and down and can avoid torps and gun fire under 10K?  God forbid just a sub and a BB are left and the BB has no counter to the sub and just has to get lucky when they come up for O2.  Hmmmm, yeahhh, riiighht. 

After all the energy WG went through to redo CVs I don't have high expectations for subs.  If you ask me, they really need to focus on finishing the surface fleets, adding maps/modes and squishing bugs rather that spinning their wheels with subs at this point.

Maybe in the future, but not now.  Not anti-sub, just anti waste of time that WG seems to revel in as of late.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
304
[USFF]
Members
433 posts
6,947 battles
12 hours ago, Chain_shot said:

Have any of you actually looked at WWII subs or post war till about 1950?

 

In  general ....

Look at the general specs of all nations subs.

Highest speed attained is 21 knots on the surface.

torpedo distance of 4 kilometers/9000 yards max.

Underwater max speed for subs is 8 knots. - IJN did have one that went about 21 knots max.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specifications_of_submarines_of_World_War_II

 

They won't be implemented unless there is fudging of the specs at a massive level.

 

So what else can you do with them ? - Maybe have them play against each other since even a basic Orlan can run them down and spank em.  So if we get subs it won't be in randoms because they can't work. they could have 200% stealth and would still be run down by the crappiest of ships.

 

All you girlie men are getting you panties all wet and twisted for no reason at this time.:cap_popcorn:

Good [edited]grief what is everyone so goddamn afraid of? How about we let them get in the game before we start judging? 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
942
[RELAX]
Members
1,163 posts
8,654 battles
Just now, Shinzon1 said:

Good [edited]grief what is everyone so goddamn afraid of? How about we let them get in the game before we start judging? 

Well given past experience with this game, I would say WG has some challenges around a teeny thing called balance.

Case in point we have been beta testing carriers now for what 6-8 months on live servers.

How long do you want to be beta testing subs on live servers before you cry uncle. - because randoms will be the testing mode for them.

So put testing of Subs and Carrier testing together on live servers  and  figure out what type of poop storm PVP will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,315
[R-F]
Members
1,718 posts
10,051 battles
5 hours ago, _RC1138 said:

Realistically the only new thing to fudge on subs is their speed

The way I see it, subs will need fudging on 3 things:

1. Speed, as everyone is discussing

2. Durability.  Submarines are not armored warships.  One good high-caliber shell, torpedo, or bomb should cripple a submarine, and ramming was a viable tactic against them by any ship that could pull that off.  I know WOWS' "Destroyers can handle BB AP shells without too much trouble" mechanic is the source of much grumbling.  Subs will need much more of the same.

3. AA.  Subs have something like a tenth of the AA guns that a destroyer of comparable era has, and DDs already feel pretty helpless against airplanes.  Is WG going to create a class that has no defense against carriers at all, save going deep and hiding?  Kind of doubt it, but I guess we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,167
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
52 minutes ago, Brhinosaurus said:

The way I see it, subs will need fudging on 3 things:

1. Speed, as everyone is discussing

2. Durability.  Submarines are not armored warships.  One good high-caliber shell, torpedo, or bomb should cripple a submarine, and ramming was a viable tactic against them by any ship that could pull that off.  I know WOWS' "Destroyers can handle BB AP shells without too much trouble" mechanic is the source of much grumbling.  Subs will need much more of the same. 

3. AA.  Subs have something like a tenth of the AA guns that a destroyer of comparable era has, and DDs already feel pretty helpless against airplanes.  Is WG going to create a class that has no defense against carriers at all, save going deep and hiding?  Kind of doubt it, but I guess we'll see. 

It depends on how they approach who counters who, but,

2. I'd argue not; if a sub is stupid enough to get caught on the surface, or boxed in and forced to surface, then they DESERVE an insta gib. Spike damage is not actually common in most games (outside of CoD or CS or other twitch shooters), but even in games like TF2 where everything is about movement, not who shoots first, their rogue/Assassin, Spy, is basically insta-gib-able due to his size, speed, and low health. And that's how it should be and is largely the problem with DD's; they do not have a GREAT means to retreat (as they are still stuck in the open) and thus are not able to be insta-gib-able, but then NOT being able to insta-gib them means that when you DO catch one, it doesn't matter, they can still come back. So I would strongly argue against that and say Subs need to have barely enough health to survive a full salvo of Overpens from at Tier BB's, much less a full HE pens.

3. This is where it gets complicated about who counters who. Obviously, DD's will be *1* of the 2 counters for subs, but the second would, in my summation, have to be either Cruisers or CV's; I prefer it be Cruisers for a few reasons, and if it is, then yes, the AA for DD's in theory could be a problem, but I would argue they have two main advantages when dealing with CV's:

1) their tiny size; the ellipsis change (which was a GOOD idea) would make them VERY difficult to DB, TB's are unlikely to be valid against subs, and rockets IMO should be removed anyway as they cause more problems than they solve (and I feel is what ACTUALLY broke the CV Rework).

2) their ability to dive; and that is how you actually balance them: how long does it TAKE to dive and how long do they stay down; because both those are basically arbitrary because the real world values are basically prohibitive, the same way torpedo reloads either did not exist or when they did, took upwards of 5-10 minutes to complete under non-combat conditions. So you can say, make this nations slow divers that take upwards of 15 seconds to dive, giving a CV time to line up an attack, while another nations bobs up and down fast but has a low time on the the bottom, so if he is patient, he can wait out the sub.

The lack of sonar for planes (air dropped sonar was NOT a thing at that point) will likewise prevent the 'constant' spotting that 'plagued' DD's.

No there's a way to make this work VERY well, they just have to smart and not lazy about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,785
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
24,180 posts
13,358 battles
6 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Normandie.  The class was designed for 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWs, she goes a blazing fast 29.5kts.  All while New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, WV'41 are stuck at 21kts "because it's realistic."

Bayern.  The class was at 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWS, she goes 25kts.

Konig.  The speed was at... guess what?... 21kts, just like USN BBs.  Yet in WoWS, she goes 24kts.  Just because.  While New York is at her historical 21kts.

Crazy speeds they were never designed for, never attained, while USN BBs in mid and low tiers are stuck to "realistic" speeds.

The Normandie was never completed and it seems they gave her Giulio Cesare, which in the real world went from 21 to 27 knots, like upgrade. It is an outlier for ship speeds to be roughly within 20% of what they really could do for balance reasons. The US and IJN ships pretty much have their historical speeds because the lines were started back in testing.

The Bayern was a 22 knot ship, not 21 knots.

On the subs I am talking about speeds far above what they generally went when submerged which was typically in the two to four knot range for conserving the batteries and because those speeds did not make lots of noise to be picked up by enemy warships. So for example the Gato typically moved at 2 knots submerged but for short sprints could do 9 knots may have a submerged speed of 18 knots an 88% increase over the speeds they really operated at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,165 posts
5,713 battles
4 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

On the subs I am talking about speeds far above what they generally went when submerged which was typically in the two to four knot range for conserving the batteries and because those speeds did not make lots of noise to be picked up by enemy warships. So for example the Gato typically moved at 2 knots submerged but for short sprints could do 9 knots may have a submerged speed of 18 knots an 88% increase over the speeds they really operated at.

Uh, you are extending my comment about ranges way too far. The high-power USN and RN conversions had very short sprint ranges because they had far more powerful electric motors in order to deliver those sprints. A Gato's sprint endurance was 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 hours. Some nations also favored endurance over raw speed, like the Russians who had huge battery endurance on their postwar boats(don't have the sprint durations, but about 3 times that of a GUPPY, similar to a Gato but at a 13-17 knot speed). I-201's a big longer-legged as well, 1 hour, probably due to being smaller. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,785
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
24,180 posts
13,358 battles
1 minute ago, Aetreus said:

Uh, you are extending my comment about ranges way too far. The high-power USN and RN conversions had very short sprint ranges because they had far more powerful electric motors in order to deliver those sprints. A Gato's sprint endurance was 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 hours. Some nations also favored endurance over raw speed, like the Russians who had huge battery endurance on their postwar boats(don't have the sprint durations, but about 3 times that of a GUPPY, similar to a Gato but at a 13-17 knot speed). I-201's a big longer-legged as well, 1 hour, probably due to being smaller. 

I used the Gato because it was the main boat the US used in WWII. Surface vessels can hold their sprint aka flank speed for many times what a sub could, days instead of hours/minutes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Members
1,740 posts
9,471 battles
15 hours ago, Chain_shot said:

Have any of you actually looked at WWII subs or post war till about 1950?

 

In  general ....

Look at the general specs of all nations subs.

Highest speed attained is 21 knots on the surface.

torpedo distance of 4 kilometers/9000 yards max.

Underwater max speed for subs is 8 knots. - IJN did have one that went about 21 knots max.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specifications_of_submarines_of_World_War_II

 

They won't be implemented unless there is fudging of the specs at a massive level.

 

So what else can you do with them ? - Maybe have them play against each other since even a basic Orlan can run them down and spank em.  So if we get subs it won't be in randoms because they can't work. they could have 200% stealth and would still be run down by the crappiest of ships.

 

All you girlie men are getting you panties all wet and twisted for no reason at this time.:cap_popcorn:

Someone didn’t read this.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_XXI_submarine

  • 17.2 knots (31.9 km/h; 19.8 mph) submerged[1]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×