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

Subs, BBs and Random matches

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

17
[WARGS]
Members
17 posts
21,061 battles

I can't find my post from a few days ago but here is what I have seen since. I need to get this out of the way first. I am a BB main so that is my perspective.

1st: Day by Day, the number of players gets fewer and fewer and usually at least  AT LEAST half of the teams are bots. Bots charge and die. Right now, these matches are decided by which sides DDs die first. and now, we dont even have players playing DDs so its blind luck and RNGesus. Whichever side gets a deficit of ASW platforms first, loses.

2nd: BBs and CVs have no defense against subs at all. Pretending that the secondaries will do something is a farce. I am using the PE Friedrich a lot in a screening role against lighter ships where my secondaries have more of an effect letting subs go after the heavier BBs. It all comes down to kill the screen.

3rd: Subs will not be good for Random Matches. There is, and has been for years now (and rightly so), the complaint that too many BBs hang back or island hump. Myself, I prefer aggressive, up close brawling. I pay for it at higher tiers already because of all the super cruisers with the magic fire bullets that start 3 fires every 5 seconds. Its hard enough to get BBs to move up and support DDs against these existing threats. Now put subs which cant be touched in the mix. DDs will lose the few ships, cruisers or BBs, that ARE willing to do close support, and most BBs will be at the map edge, until they get hunted down by the subs later in the match. THIS WILL LITERALLY KILL ALL INCENTIVE TO PLAY BBs. CVs will have it a little better than BBs, I think, in that they can strike AND stay out of range at the same time. but once the battle becomes once sided, a sub, which cant be touched, goes to kill the CV, which can literally do absolutely nothing about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,124 posts
15,336 battles

One possible solution (feel free to critique) would be to add a new anti sub shell type for 200MM + guns. These would be derpy, short range (8K max) and useless against surface ships, including a surfaced sub (they just shatter). What they would do is act more like depth charges. Hit the water and sink before detonating affecting subs at any depth they can be spotted at from a surface ship. Better blast radius than a normal HE shell. Slow velocity should help landing the shells in the area of the sub instead of  the way short or way over you get with high velocity shells when shooting at a horizontal surface.

I know. they never existed. But if WG limited things to what really existed, the Russian BB and CA lines would be really, really short. It would give a better self defense option to the BBs and CAs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[WARGS]
Members
17 posts
21,061 battles

I just came up with this. AND it was real world. Subs, when used for actual battles, were guarding the approaches and not near the battle fleets due to the chaos a sub report would cause because there was no way of knowing IF they sub you spotted was friend or foe. Let's go that route. Once you submerge, the sub just shows up as a "sub contact" with no visable on screen identifier. You could still co-ordinate thru chat, but otherwise, any sub would be seen as a potential threat. This might keep them from just running up the middle with the DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,124 posts
15,336 battles
42 minutes ago, The_Big_Woof said:

I just came up with this. AND it was real world. Subs, when used for actual battles, were guarding the approaches and not near the battle fleets due to the chaos a sub report would cause because there was no way of knowing IF they sub you spotted was friend or foe. Let's go that route. Once you submerge, the sub just shows up as a "sub contact" with no visable on screen identifier. You could still co-ordinate thru chat, but otherwise, any sub would be seen as a potential threat. This might keep them from just running up the middle with the DDs.

True, brought this up long ago and obviously WG didn't care. A sub with realistic capabilities wouild be pretty useless anyway in a high speed  surface battle. With everyone using the same ships (in game) telling friend-or-foe would be impossible for surface and subs without WG making them red or green.

"Captain, there"s a Yamato coming around the island to port at 10 K, bearing 270"

        'Roger, can anybody see what flag it is flying?"

"Looks like a Corgi, sir"

     "Anything else?"

"Yes sir, Its flying some Sierra Mike signal flags, They seem to make it go faster."

    "Thats all?"

"It's shooting at us sir!"

     "Primaries or secondaries? Have to make sure its not a TK. Don't want our ship to turn pink."

"Both, Sir!!"

    "RETURN FI.........

Edited by Sabot_100
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[WARGS]
Members
17 posts
21,061 battles
22 minutes ago, Sabot_100 said:

True, brought this up long ago and obviously WG didn't care. A sub with realistic capabilities wouild be pretty useless anyway in a high speed  surface battle. With everyone using the same ships (in game) telling friend-or-foe would be impossible for surface and subs without WG making them red or green.

"Captain, there"s a Yamato coming around the island to port at 10 K, bearing 090"

        'Roger, can anybody see what flag it is flying?"

"Looks like a Corgi, sir"

     "Anything else?"

"Yes sir, Its flying some Sierra Mike signal flags, They seem to make it go faster."

    "Thats all?"

"It's shooting at us sir!"

     "Primaries or secondaries? Have to make sure its not a TK. Don't want our ship to turn pink."

"Both, Sir!!"

    "RETURN FI.........

Subs can ID any ship, just not be identified. Friendlies who sank their own subs, would still be penalized.

Edited by The_Big_Woof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,124 posts
15,336 battles
58 minutes ago, The_Big_Woof said:

Hmmm.. well that would be almost like the anti-sub mortors used later in WW2.

True,. That could be another similar solution, to the ASW that DDs now carry except at range. Auto targeting the sub. .Depends on which WG thinks is easiest to implement. Might even make it cost you. Have to swap a torpedo or med/heavy AA mount  on each side to fit it in. The shell solution would not require modifying any/all the ship models.

Edited by Sabot_100
not
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,124 posts
15,336 battles
11 minutes ago, The_Big_Woof said:

Subs can ID any ship, just not be identified. Friendlies who sank their own subs, would still be penalized.

Right. I was just pointing out that all ships get to know friend or foe on all other ships. The IRL thing of attacking any sub contact near your ships would not apply. WG  has enough problems with TK and friendly fire. Not going to put in a mechanic that encourages the trigger happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[WARGS]
Members
17 posts
21,061 battles
7 minutes ago, Sabot_100 said:

True,. That could be another similar solution, to the ASW that DDs now carry except at range. Auto targeting the sub. .Depends on which WG thinks is easiest to implement. Might even make it cost you. Have to swap a torpedo or med/heavy AA mount  on each side to fit it in. The shell solution would require modifying any/all the ship models.

I like it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[WARGS]
Members
17 posts
21,061 battles
1 hour ago, Sabot_100 said:

Right. I was just pointing out that all ships get to know friend or foe on all other ships. The IRL thing of attacking any sub contact near your ships would not apply. WG  has enough problems with TK and friendly fire. Not going to put in a mechanic that encourages the trigger happy.

lol.. I look at it as "encouraging" the subs to stay back or away from any they did not want to attack.. in short, make them act like submarines, not underwater torpedo boats.

 

(no, i don't usually make sense)

Edited by The_Big_Woof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,124 posts
15,336 battles
1 hour ago, The_Big_Woof said:

in short, make them act like submarines, not underwater torpedo boats.

Thats what WG wants, the undersea torpedo boat. We just have to hope it never comes to randoms. Probably a vain hope. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×