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

The more I watch Sub gameplay the more disappointed I get with WG

184 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
1,730 posts

The ping mechanic is so horribly game-y and absurd its painful to see it in action. Late cold war era ping+homing torpedoes on WW1-WW2 era subs.... and implemented via a mechanic that belongs in a toddler age range video game (sonar ping+fill in the lights)

I would prefer sub torpedo play be more WW2 like (funny to want that in a mostly-WW2 era ship combat game no?). 

 

Why can't WG make the subs fire torpedoes that do damage somewhere between air-dropped torps and destroyer torps.... and fires them via a WW2 immersive mechanic? Why can't they introduce subs as team-play ships rather than brutal high damage super stealthy glass cannons? 

 

Torpedo Attach Mechanics:

- If a tier 10 torpedo from an airplane does 10k damage and a destroyer launched torp does 20k damage then the submarine torp should do 15k. Simple as that. 

- The torpedo attack mechanic should be that the player needs to go to periscope depth, use periscope scope, lock the target (like surface ships do), press a button that will begin a short timer...during that timer the player must keep the ship in clear line of sight and periscope aimpoint aimed at the locked ship... when that timer ends the sub will display a narrow-spread torpedo lead-aim pointer just like surface ships do... and it will display it for 10 seconds or so. 

This is the equivalent of WW2 era subs performing calculations either by hand or with a targeting computer to get a computed lead point. 

The player can then aim the torpedoes via the periscope aimpoint (equivalent to how brit CLs use single-torp, single-line indicators inside their firing arc) and fire them. 

The torpedoes once fired will swim away from the sub for about 100m or so then turn to aimed-at location by player and swims straight there. This allows the sub to fire within its firing arc without being forced to point the nose specifically at the aimed-at location (though if the player does its better as the torps dont lose time turning nor get offset by the slightly different swim-to-target angle). 

Different nations have their national perks applied to this mechanic: USN has faster timers due to USN using computers on subs but torpedo range is short. German subs have more effective torps (faster/more damage) but torps are visible at longer distances. IJN sub torps are very stealthy and have longer range but are slow to calculate (done by hand) and deal the lowest damage of any nation yet have good flood chance.  

In tier 9 and 10 the acoustic homing torps can be introduced ... the torps would be aimed and fired the same way as the normal torps except that they will not arm until they've swum 1km and will home in on ANY acoustic source within 2km of their nose cone while en-route. IJN would not get acoustic torps but would get the option of loading deepwater torps (hits cruisers up to cvs only) that bypass torpedo protection (just like the current double-ping bonus nonsense) and have zero flood chance.   

Of course, the player has the choice of equipping homing or regular torpedoes at these tiers. 

 

Team-Play not Glass Cannon:

- With their torp damage being somewhere in between air dropped and destroyer plus their reload timer and amount of torps fired per reload being smaller this makes the submarine have no better nor worse damage output than said air dropped torps or destroyers. This is why the submarine should be the premier stealth-scout for the fleet.

A sub should be able to lock a target and 'designate it' for friendly ships as a priority target (ships in team would see an icon showing it is designated target) by pressing a button (same method used to designate manual secondaries?). Can only designate one target at a time. 

Once designated, that target would lose any and all defensive camo bonuses (the -detect range and +shell dispersion of incoming shells) it may have and the sub would be getting all spotting-related bonuses to that ship. 

- Subs can fire off a sonar ping that would act like a radar for team but only within LOS and it would be in a narrow forward arc from ship's nose. Basically, a DD torp narrow spread cone that the sonar ping (animated the same way it is now) pulses outwards..and any ships inside that cone out to its max range (20km?) will ONLY SHOW IN MINIMAP of friendly team for 20 seconds. Of course, any ship equipped with hydrophones (subs, DDs, cruisers and some BBs) would know the sub's location in minimap only upon being hit by the ping. So it works both ways. BALANCE. 

- Subs would have permanently activated,  passive long range hydrophone that detects ships out to 12km and reports their location to team's MINIMAP only as long as the sub is on surface or periscope depth (aka only when sub has a means to send messages to other ships..cant do that underwater!).

This form of indirect spotting via passive and active sonar ping will grant the sub xp and credits based on if a red ship is sunk while the sub is spotting it this way. It doesn't count damage applied to targets, only if they sunk while the sub was indirect-spotting it for team. 

  • Cool 29
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,308
[PVE]
Members
1,495 posts
12,938 battles

 A player comes up with sub gameplay ideas that make sense and are way better than WG's silly plans.

Should tell ya something.

 

(Although the fanbois will soon be here spouting off the company line, adapt or leave etc.)

Edited by Rabbitt81
  • Cool 11
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,064
[PVE]
Members
18,479 posts
11,428 battles
4 minutes ago, Rabbitt81 said:

 A player comes up with sub gameplay ideas that make sense and are way better than WG'ings silly plans.

Should tell ya something.

I agree. These concepts should be investigated. They sound reasonable.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,217
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,910 posts
9,171 battles
34 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

- If a tier 10 torpedo from an airplane does 10k damage and a destroyer launched torp does 20k damage then the submarine torp should do 15k. Simple as that. 

 

Why? This sounds arbritrary to me. Considering that Submarine launched torpedos are launched in fewer numbers than destroyer launched torpedos, that a submarine has potentially fewer opportunities to find an attack solution than either a destroyer or a CV, one could as easily argue that submarine launched torpedos need to be more powerful than destroyer launched torps. 20k per torpedo, (quite as arbritary a figure) is quite as reasonable sounding.

But either way, torpedo dmg alpha has to be considered and weighed as a proportion of the total potential dmg throughput of a warship in WOWS, as a proportion of the warships dmg dealing efficiency. 

I cannot comment on the rest, not having taken part in the TST beta (yet), and so cannot contrast and compare your suggestions/demands with the current state of gameplay. Have you been on the TST @Skyfaller?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,013
[_-_]
Members
2,657 posts
7,614 battles
14 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

I agree. These concepts should be investigated. They sound reasonable.

It may be too late for a complete re-write. The fact that they're confident enough to go into a closed beta indicates they've passed their sunk-cost point of no return as far as the core mechanics go.

Too bad, really. This was an opportunity, now it's a headlight in the tunnel.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
346 posts
35 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

The ping mechanic is so horribly game-y and absurd its painful to see it in action. Late cold war era ping+homing torpedoes on WW1-WW2 era subs.... and implemented via a mechanic that belongs in a toddler age range video game (sonar ping+fill in the lights)

How about before making a claim you actually look things up?

"The first passive acoustic torpedoes were developed nearly simultaneously by the United States Navy and the Germans during World War II. The Germans developed the G7e/T4 Falke, which was first deployed by the submarines U-603 , U-758 and U-221 in March 1943. Few acoustic torpedoes were actually used and quickly phased out of service in favor of the T4's successor, the G7es T5 Zaunkönig torpedo in August 1943. The T5 first saw widespread use in September 1943 against North Atlantic escort vessels and merchant ships in convoys."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_24_mine

So yes, acostic homing torpedoes did exist and were used in WW II.

Wargaming just adjusted the sound homing to make it more skill based and gameplay friendly. 

Edited by Neko_Ship_Akashi
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
742
[EQRN]
Members
1,618 posts
13,579 battles
10 minutes ago, So_lt_Goes said:

It may be too late for a complete re-write. The fact that they're confident enough to go into a closed beta indicates they've passed their sunk-cost point of no return as far as the core mechanics go.

Too bad, really. This was an opportunity, now it's a headlight in the tunnel.

Could you see WG (or any company) ever say, we want to add a feature, we want to hear your ideas (in the tens of thousands) how to do it?

WG’s sub concept is... weird, but integrating subs into WoWs must involve weirdness somewhere due to the game design.  The best one can do is move that weirdness from one aspect of play to another.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,730 posts

Neko, You need to read more into it. WW2 era acoustic torpedoes actually worked the way I described them to work in my first post. 

WW2 acoustic torps were as your own quote states: PASSIVE. 

Aka they were fired and they homed in on the first noise they heard. 

Late cold war and the ones in the game right now use ACTIVE sonar homing. Either the sub or the torpedo would emit a ping to find the target then use a combo of active and passive homing to hit target.  

I disagree with any 'skilled gameplay' claims of this system. There is no skill in tagging a target with a ping that travels as fast as a shell when at or near torpedo ranges. Also, 'gameplay friendly' is another word for 'no skill or effort required'. 

 

WW2 subs did not, ever, attack this way in any form. It'd be like introducing guided missile cruisers into the game now and claiming they are 'gameplay friendly' and require 'skilled gameplay' to highlight a ship and click a button so that the weapon auto-steers itself to target.  

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
346 posts
4 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

You need to read more into it. WW2 era acoustic torpedoes actually worked the way I described them to work in my first post. 

WW2 acoustic torps were as your own quote states: PASSIVE. 

Aka they were fired and they homed in on the first noise they heard. 

Late cold war and the ones in the game right now use ACTIVE sonar homing. Either the sub or the torpedo would emit a ping to find the target then use a combo of active and passive homing to hit target.  

You do realize that passive torps also pinged? Wargaming made us able to ping so sub gameplay isn't boring. The 'ping' points, if you actually pay attention are at sound points, the front of the hull and the rear, the torpedoes are being passive, the 'ping' we do is just for gameplay intrest. 

On a more serious question, have you actually been on the test server? Because if not you are in no position to criticize the mechanics. Sure you can criticize the UI, but you can't critize the mechanics. 

Your suggestion for example, would make submarine play extremely tedious and boring and very different from normal ship play, and people already complained enough (and still do) about CVs having a different playstyle, adding a second class like that would be just asking for more trouble. 

Edited by Neko_Ship_Akashi
  • Cool 1
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,998
[SALVO]
Members
22,969 posts
23,578 battles
1 hour ago, Skyfaller said:

The ping mechanic is so horribly game-y and absurd its painful to see it in action. Late cold war era ping+homing torpedoes on WW1-WW2 era subs.... and implemented via a mechanic that belongs in a toddler age range video game (sonar ping+fill in the lights)

I would prefer sub torpedo play be more WW2 like (funny to want that in a mostly-WW2 era ship combat game no?). 

 

Why can't WG make the subs fire torpedoes that do damage somewhere between air-dropped torps and destroyer torps.... and fires them via a WW2 immersive mechanic? Why can't they introduce subs as team-play ships rather than brutal high damage super stealthy glass cannons? 

 

Torpedo Attach Mechanics:

- If a tier 10 torpedo from an airplane does 10k damage and a destroyer launched torp does 20k damage then the submarine torp should do 15k. Simple as that. 

- The torpedo attack mechanic should be that the player needs to go to periscope depth, use periscope scope, lock the target (like surface ships do), press a button that will begin a short timer...during that timer the player must keep the ship in clear line of sight and periscope aimpoint aimed at the locked ship... when that timer ends the sub will display a narrow-spread torpedo lead-aim pointer just like surface ships do... and it will display it for 10 seconds or so. 

This is the equivalent of WW2 era subs performing calculations either by hand or with a targeting computer to get a computed lead point. 

The player can then aim the torpedoes via the periscope aimpoint (equivalent to how brit CLs use single-torp, single-line indicators inside their firing arc) and fire them. 

The torpedoes once fired will swim away from the sub for about 100m or so then turn to aimed-at location by player and swims straight there. This allows the sub to fire within its firing arc without being forced to point the nose specifically at the aimed-at location (though if the player does its better as the torps dont lose time turning nor get offset by the slightly different swim-to-target angle). 

Different nations have their national perks applied to this mechanic: USN has faster timers due to USN using computers on subs but torpedo range is short. German subs have more effective torps (faster/more damage) but torps are visible at longer distances. IJN sub torps are very stealthy and have longer range but are slow to calculate (done by hand) and deal the lowest damage of any nation yet have good flood chance.  

In tier 9 and 10 the acoustic homing torps can be introduced ... the torps would be aimed and fired the same way as the normal torps except that they will not arm until they've swum 1km and will home in on ANY acoustic source within 2km of their nose cone while en-route. IJN would not get acoustic torps but would get the option of loading deepwater torps (hits cruisers up to cvs only) that bypass torpedo protection (just like the current double-ping bonus nonsense) and have zero flood chance.   

Of course, the player has the choice of equipping homing or regular torpedoes at these tiers. 

 

Team-Play not Glass Cannon:

- With their torp damage being somewhere in between air dropped and destroyer plus their reload timer and amount of torps fired per reload being smaller this makes the submarine have no better nor worse damage output than said air dropped torps or destroyers. This is why the submarine should be the premier stealth-scout for the fleet.

A sub should be able to lock a target and 'designate it' for friendly ships as a priority target (ships in team would see an icon showing it is designated target) by pressing a button (same method used to designate manual secondaries?). Can only designate one target at a time. 

Once designated, that target would lose any and all defensive camo bonuses (the -detect range and +shell dispersion of incoming shells) it may have and the sub would be getting all spotting-related bonuses to that ship. 

- Subs can fire off a sonar ping that would act like a radar for team but only within LOS and it would be in a narrow forward arc from ship's nose. Basically, a DD torp narrow spread cone that the sonar ping (animated the same way it is now) pulses outwards..and any ships inside that cone out to its max range (20km?) will ONLY SHOW IN MINIMAP of friendly team for 20 seconds. Of course, any ship equipped with hydrophones (subs, DDs, cruisers and some BBs) would know the sub's location in minimap only upon being hit by the ping. So it works both ways. BALANCE. 

- Subs would have permanently activated,  passive long range hydrophone that detects ships out to 12km and reports their location to team's MINIMAP only as long as the sub is on surface or periscope depth (aka only when sub has a means to send messages to other ships..cant do that underwater!).

This form of indirect spotting via passive and active sonar ping will grant the sub xp and credits based on if a red ship is sunk while the sub is spotting it this way. It doesn't count damage applied to targets, only if they sunk while the sub was indirect-spotting it for team. 

First, sub launched torpedoes should do the same damage as ship launched ones, since, IIRC, they were the same torpedoes.  Sub launched torps would NOT be weaker than ship launched ones.

Second, Subs are glass cannons!!!  First, last, and always!    They are smaller than DDs and would have fewer HP than DDs.  And their only weapons are torpedoes.  That's pretty much the very definition of glass cannon.

Third, team play?  Hell no!  I don't want to play ANY type of ship whose job is to support everyone else's fun but my own.  This is why I don't even like the idea of the odd numbered tier CVs being "support carriers".   Can subs provide some support?  Sure.  But it should NOT be their raison d'être

Fourth, subs should NOT get permanent long range hydro any more than surface ships should get permanent long range radar.

 

Anyways, while there are some decent tidbits of ideas here, the overall post is so much crap.  

 

  • Boring 9
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15
[-TNG-]
Members
60 posts
1,615 battles

Some of these ideas are actually pretty good, and it’d be great if they were added in. Perhaps hybridizing a few ideas currently present with these would be possible. Perhaps letting subs keep their acoustic homing torps, complete with pings, but limit them to a long reload, while giving them conventional, faster-reloading, long-range torps to compensate, with the pings serving the “designate” mechanic that you outlined when the homing torps aren’t in use (I would actually like that mechanic to be adapted for CVs, perhaps with the return of multiple load outs. Some sort of spotting flare that lights up a ship and gives a noticeable shell dispersion buff to ships targeting the lit-up vessel). Overall, those are some pretty alright ideas you set out, OP. Though toro damage shouldn’t be nerfed for subs. It is their only means of serious offense, after all. 

Edited by Shadow0206

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,730 posts

To 'ping' the torpedo would need an active sonar installed. WW2 torps did not have them. Only late cold war torpedoes had such technology. 

The torpedoes in the game do not steer themselves to target unless you PING the ship. So again, you're wrong in stating its just for gameplay interest. One ping homes the 2nd ping allows the bypassing of torp bulge protection. 

 

My suggestion would make sub play be VERY similar to destroyer torpedo play.... the torps swim in a straight line. The only difference is they'd be stealthier versions of a DD that can dive..but to fire their torps they'd need to actually aim the same way as a destroyer or cruiser does and they have to wait a few seconds for the lead aim timer to pop up (unlike surface ships which get it automatically). 

What we have now is the actual 'different' gameplay you claim is so disruptive. A CV at least has to deal with RNG in dive bombers and has to make his attack runs manually with all aircraft. A Sub as it is now only fires the torps, pings and forgets about it... everything else is up to the victim. You can see it yourself.. fire a torp, let it swim 2/3rds of the way to target then double ping it, dive and turn.. fire and forget. The torps home on their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,426
[CMFRT]
Members
10,527 posts
40 minutes ago, So_lt_Goes said:

It may be too late for a complete re-write. The fact that they're confident enough to go into a closed beta indicates they've passed their sunk-cost point of no return as far as the core mechanics go.

Too bad, really. This was an opportunity, now it's a headlight in the tunnel.

Really, the moment we learned about it, it was too late.  WG never lets anything out until it's too late to actually prevent disaster.

 

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,730 posts
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

First, sub launched torpedoes should do the same damage as ship launched ones, since, IIRC, they were the same torpedoes.  Sub launched torps would NOT be weaker than ship launched ones.

Second, Subs are glass cannons!!!  First, last, and always!    They are smaller than DDs and would have fewer HP than DDs.  And their only weapons are torpedoes.  That's pretty much the very definition of glass cannon.

Third, team play?  Hell no!  I don't want to play ANY type of ship whose job is to support everyone else's fun but my own.  This is why I don't even like the idea of the odd numbered tier CVs being "support carriers".   Can subs provide some support?  Sure.  But it should NOT be their raison d'être

Fourth, subs should NOT get permanent long range hydro any more than surface ships should get permanent long range radar.

 

 

Actually no, the torps fired by surface ships were larger. Sub torps thus had weaker warheads too. For example, IJN had different versions of the Long Lance .. Type 93 for surface ships (longer, bigger, heavier warheads), Type 95 for subs (smaller torp for the sub's torp tubes. weaker warhead), and Type 93 for midget submarines (mini torps).

My mention of glass cannons is that it is the ONLY thing they are in the game now. They can't really spot or scout like a DD can...if anything (and ironically) the only thing they CAN scout out for team is enemy destroyers and thats for a few seconds before they must dive to avoid being spotted themselves. 

The permanent hydrophone only reports to minimap not to your actual view. That makes it very different from radar. Team cannot see/lock/fire at target unless they try a blind shot where the ship is shown on minimap. It also only works on line of sight. 

Teamplay elements are there for when your sub cannot attack due to certainty of death (recovering air, area too hot to enter, etc) if you do so but you can still spot and support team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[TARK]
Members
4,263 posts
1,630 battles

I'm looking forward to joining in the slaughter of ships come launch.

This is going to kill battleship play at high tiers, most likely.

But, no problem man, WG will fix it with some lazy band aid and buff to something else.

It's the game they want. Might as well enjoy it.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,288
[SOV]
Members
2,959 posts
1 hour ago, Rabbitt81 said:

 A player comes up with sub gameplay ideas that make sense and are way better than WG'ings silly plans.

Should tell ya something.

 

(Althought the fanbois will be here soon spouting off the company line, adapt or leave etc.)

This game is so far removed from WW2 now anyway.

Maybe we should take a page from the CV hate mode that made the player base leave. Just dodge the nerf.

Cannot wait for a fresh string of "your a Cancer" and "you are destroying the game."

O uea its ging to be interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,376
[POP]
Beta Testers
4,259 posts
6,088 battles

i actually don't care  if a underwater missile  make noises or not.

i want to know if subs will be OP or UP in the game,seriously.

i want to know if playing with subs and against them will be fun,screw historical accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,064
[PVE]
Members
18,479 posts
11,428 battles
1 hour ago, So_lt_Goes said:

It may be too late for a complete re-write. The fact that they're confident enough to go into a closed beta indicates they've passed their sunk-cost point of no return as far as the core mechanics go.

Too bad, really. This was an opportunity, now it's a headlight in the tunnel.

It's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
311 posts
39 battles
2 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

It's possible.

I don't believe it is, if you look at the entire game, the core mechanics have changed little since the beginning of CBT, with the exception of the CV rework.  All the important things were ironed out behind closed doors in CAT.  I believe the 2018 event was probably the first and last time the general playerbase had a chance to influence WG's decision on how subs should be implemented.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,064
[PVE]
Members
18,479 posts
11,428 battles
2 minutes ago, TheSeventhSeeker said:

I don't believe it is, if you look at the entire game, the core mechanics have changed little since the beginning of CBT, with the exception of the CV rework.  All the important things were ironed out behind closed doors in CAT.  I believe the 2018 event was probably the first and last time the general playerbase had a chance to influence WG's decision on how subs should be implemented.

I was saying it's possible that it is too late. WG could change it, but @So_It_Goes is most likely right in that it won't change. The submerged speed boost to all sub is my biggest problem with the WG plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,309
[WOLFG]
Members
24,856 posts
6,166 battles
11 minutes ago, Cruxdei said:

I want to know if playing with subs and against them will be fun,screw historical accuracy.

You won't know until you try, fun is subjective.

For example, I would almost rather slit my throat with a playing card than play a game with them, but many find card games fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,426
[CMFRT]
Members
10,527 posts
6 minutes ago, TheSeventhSeeker said:

I don't believe it is, if you look at the entire game, the core mechanics have changed little since the beginning of CBT, with the exception of the CV rework.  All the important things were ironed out behind closed doors in CAT.  I believe the 2018 event was probably the first and last time the general playerbase had a chance to influence WG's decision on how subs should be implemented.

And because "lots" of people were willing to play the cartoon caricature soggy DDs in that event, which was entirely against bots and didn't require anyone to counter-play against subs, and didn't effect anyone's main modes experience, and gave out nice payouts... WG seems to think that "players liked the subs" and "there's a big demand".   :Smile_facepalm:

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[TARK]
Members
4,263 posts
1,630 battles
1 hour ago, Cruxdei said:

i actually don't care  if a underwater missile  make noises or not.

i want to know if subs will be OP or UP in the game,seriously.

i want to know if playing with subs and against them will be fun,screw historical accuracy.

OP, of course. Got to sell the premium subs.

What happens after the sales period? Dont know...but I'm sure WG will have moved on to a new gimmick to make OP to sell more pixels.

It is the way this game is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,479
[WORX]
Members
6,541 posts
16,206 battles

Man, the saboteurs and their propaganda  are out in force today.... Not even has the class been defined yet and already people want to define it for WG...

The class is in testing... Nothing is done yet, TST testing is only a proof of concept... ITS Not for more detailed concept progression.

In other words... Chill out, testing is not done, ideas are not yet fully implanted/implemented...TST version of subs will not be the same as the live version so...

Those among us who are in the art of spreading misinformation and/or sabotaging progress, STOP IT! In the end, it will only end up backfiring on the player base...

Then the player base dont have the integrity to admit wrong doing (ala the progression of Beta Rework CVs to the dumpster fire of beyond 0.8.0.1).

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,426
[CMFRT]
Members
10,527 posts
Just now, Navalpride33 said:

Man, the saboteurs and their propaganda  are out in force today.... Not even has the class been defined yet and already people want to define it for WG...

The class is in testing... Nothing is done yet, TST testing is only a proof of concept... ITS Not for more detailed concept progression.

In other words... Chill out, testing is not done, ideas are not yet fully implanted/implemented...TST version of subs will not be the same as the live version so...

Those among us who are in the art of spreading misinformation and/or sabotaging progress, STOP IT! In the end, it will only end up backfiring on the player base...

Then the player base dont have the integrity to admit wrong doing (ala the progression of Beta Rework CVs to the dumpster fire of beyond 0.8.0.1).

 

It's like CV rework deja vu,   People give feedback based on the information available, which is plenty (ship specs, preview videos, testing streams and videos and reviews, etc) -- and they're told "it's too soon, you don't know enough yet, your feedback is worthless", right up until it's too late to change anything.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×