Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
NoZoupForYou

Dear WG, Don't Mess Subs Up

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,019
Members
2,011 posts
28,745 battles

And if they do, so what? WG is manifestly unresponsive, and the addicts continue to shovel money into WG's bucket. So there's really zero incentive for them to be careful.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[EQRN]
Members
2,243 posts
20,562 battles

Too late.  I’ve been playing sub mode to burn off the 5 xp/credit missions and it is far far far from ready for prime time.  How WG thought that this iteration was worth testing is beyond me.  

And it is going live, with a tweak here and there.  WG doesn’t like Scenarios drawing numbers from Randoms, they won’t tolerate yet another mode drawing numbers from Randoms indefinitely.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,366
[BFBTW]
Members
4,181 posts
9,581 battles

I wish WG would have incentivized the mode more. Some ideas:

  • Rental T6 BB/CA premiums
  • Mission chains to permanently earn them (maybe 100 wins or something)
  • Nominal steel amounts per game

Anything to help make them more beneficial for veteran players to play so that the games were more normal.

The queue on the first day was nearly all surface ships; now it's nearly all subs/CVs. Neither of those are particularly useful for WG.

I personally found the mode completely boring for all ships very quickly, because playing glorified coop (with 5 bots every game) is just not a fun experience. I was unlucky and didn't get subs until the second to last day and that basically meant I was unable to play against any real battleship/cruiser players as every game was human subs/CVs/destroyers and the gameplay was completely messed up. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,413
[GGWP]
Members
7,582 posts
17,943 battles
49 minutes ago, FrodoFraggin said:

 

And it is going live, with a tweak here and there.  WG doesn’t like Scenarios drawing numbers from Randoms, they won’t tolerate yet another mode drawing numbers from Randoms indefinitely.

Screen shots I've seen are only showing about 8 humans max atm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,378
[WMD]
Members
1,928 posts
10,958 battles
9 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

I wish WG would have incentivized the mode more. Some ideas:

  • Rental T6 BB/CA premiums
  • Mission chains to permanently earn them (maybe 100 wins or something)
  • Nominal steel amounts per game

Anything to help make them more beneficial for veteran players to play so that the games were more normal.

The queue on the first day was nearly all surface ships; now it's nearly all subs/CVs. Neither of those are particularly useful for WG.

I personally found the mode completely boring for all ships very quickly, because playing glorified coop (with 5 bots every game) is just not a fun experience. I was unlucky and didn't get subs until the second to last day and that basically meant I was unable to play against any real battleship/cruiser players as every game was human subs/CVs/destroyers and the gameplay was completely messed up. 

I agree 100%

T6 is ok, but not the most fun tier, so it has to overcome that with significantly improved rewards. 

I stopped playing my DDs because it was boring to "farm" damage in a T6 DD against bots, then maybe get a chance to do some ASW. In the same amount of time I could play my T8+ boats, make more credits, xp, and make progress in my campaign. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[EQRN]
Members
2,243 posts
20,562 battles
2 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Screen shots I've seen are only showing about 8 humans max atm

Most of my teams have been bots, though strangely I don’t get the same humans game to game, one would expect if only a handful of people playing that at least some faces would be re-appearing game to game.  Which is why I think they’re monkey-ing with MM to get as many games going as quickly as possible and the real numbers are probably bigger.  However many people are playing though, WG will want them back in Randoms eventually and they’re not going to mothball the investment they’ve put into subs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,438
[SALVO]
Members
3,508 posts
7,395 battles
25 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Screen shots I've seen are only showing about 8 humans max atm

Well plus the 149 subs in queue :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,832
[PQUOD]
[PQUOD]
Members
5,078 posts
19,467 battles

I think the majority of people got their subs at the last. So the transition was the more people got their subs the more it became a higher paying coop due to more surface boats became bots. This could be the reason submarines was not allowed into the training rooms. The thought being the surface fleet would become more of a coop environment and more people who are interested would be playing submarines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,366
[BFBTW]
Members
4,181 posts
9,581 battles
Just now, Capt_Ahab1776 said:

I think the majority of people got their subs at the last. So the transition was the more people got their subs the more it became a higher paying coop due to more surface boats became bots. This could be the reason submarines was not allowed into the training rooms. The thought being the surface fleet would become more of a coop environment and more people who are interested would be playing submarines.

There's just no incentive for 3x as many people to play surface ships as subs. You need 8 surface ships to join the 3 subs and CV that are interested in playing.

I suspect training rooms were not allowed because not all maps have underwater terrain modeled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,832
[PQUOD]
[PQUOD]
Members
5,078 posts
19,467 battles
17 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

There's just no incentive for 3x as many people to play surface ships as subs. You need 8 surface ships to join the 3 subs and CV that are interested in playing

The incentive they have given are the boosts to XP,  exchange coins, and yellow back to school camo if you play (and I think win, not for sure) three games in a BB. Which I suspect is their main interest as far as data gathering on surface ships go on. Currently the only counter play they have is to try to maneuver  away and maybe priority select with their secondaries. This is of course if they have no screening friendly ASW capable DD’s or cruisers.

23 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

I suspect training rooms were not allowed because not all maps have underwater terrain modeled.

This is probably true. Didn’t think about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
753
[USN]
Members
1,640 posts
21,132 battles
1 hour ago, enderland07 said:

I wish WG would have incentivized the mode more. Some ideas:

  • Rental T6 BB/CA premiums
  • Mission chains to permanently earn them (maybe 100 wins or something)
  • Nominal steel amounts per game

Anything to help make them more beneficial for veteran players to play so that the games were more normal.

The queue on the first day was nearly all surface ships; now it's nearly all subs/CVs. Neither of those are particularly useful for WG.

I personally found the mode completely boring for all ships very quickly, because playing glorified coop (with 5 bots every game) is just not a fun experience. I was unlucky and didn't get subs until the second to last day and that basically meant I was unable to play against any real battleship/cruiser players as every game was human subs/CVs/destroyers and the gameplay was completely messed up. 

I only played 4 sub battles, only enough to get the Twitch mission done. I would of played a lot more if they gave the ability to earn T6 premiums from it, even if they’re among the crappier ones like Haunghe or Mutsu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[AUG]
Members
30 posts
8,001 battles
1 hour ago, FrodoFraggin said:

Too late.  I’ve been playing sub mode to burn off the 5 xp/credit missions and it is far far far from ready for prime time.  How WG thought that this iteration was worth testing is beyond me.  

And it is going live, with a tweak here and there.  WG doesn’t like Scenarios drawing numbers from Randoms, they won’t tolerate yet another mode drawing numbers from Randoms indefinitely.

I'll begin by saying I fully believe Subs will be added to Random Battles at some point in the future. That being said, this is not the final form.

They've stated multiple times that this is a first step to get it out of the test server and onto one with more actual players on it, where they would hopefully behave more like they do in a regular battle than kids drifting in a rental car (which is what a lot of Test Server gameplay feels like) - functionally, the Subs mode is identical to the last iteration on test.

As for "it is going live, with a tweak here and there" - they've already stated that they are working on the ASW gameplay for Heavy Cruisers and Battleships. I believe I also heard mention of Carriers having some form of ASW added, but I am not 100%. This is in no way the final mode or full gameplay loop, and they will have to test it more in the future before it goes "Full Live."

I fully believe that WG has damaged itself, especially considering the Puerto Rico communications botch, but in this instance they have made numerous efforts to communicate what is going on and it appears people are willfully either ignoring that or refusing to believe it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,832
[PQUOD]
[PQUOD]
Members
5,078 posts
19,467 battles

I’m playing almost exclusively submarines now. They have tremendous potential as is. I’m sure they will be adjusted, probably nerf bludgeoned after the live test server event is over. I imagine some thought of maybe giving BB’s more of a opportunity to defend themselves with main battery guns having the ability to plunge deeper into the water with damage.

 

Now if we could just get the IJN I-400 :Smile_trollface:

 

(this picture after zooming in is actually the I-401)

C77AEBE6-B788-4843-BACD-E37B5B02F876.jpeg

Edited by Capt_Ahab1776

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[EQRN]
Members
2,243 posts
20,562 battles
2 hours ago, Reverend_Bunny said:

I believe I also heard mention of Carriers having some form of ASW added, but I am not 100%.

WG doesn’t need to add this.  Who wouldn’t want to see CV players explain why it’s not fair that a class of ships exist for which there is no counter play? :fish_haloween:

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[CLRN]
Members
609 posts
122 battles
7 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

We are at a pivotal moment in the game...

 

 

The thing is zoup, you say "wg dont screw subs up" once in that entire video. May i ask you whats the point of creating this thread?

And i dont know if its just me but sadly i found that video more like an apology video to wg...

Edit: btw. Im sorry to tell you this but they have already screwed it up. Subs are straight up broken. Their only counter is enemy subs. Thats it. You are gonna say: " but hey its just a test" (actually you jave already said that in video). But if you are going to test something in multiple phases, you make some tweaks between each phase. There is absolutely no change between the subs we have in live server and subs we had in PTS . They didnt even add other maps so we could test them on other maps. Mark my words, they are gonna introduce subs into randoms in this state. 

Edited by ghostbuster_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,066
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
4,326 posts
12,980 battles
4 hours ago, Capt_Ahab1776 said:

battery guns having the ability to plunge deeper into the water with damage.

Or require submarines to travel more often on the actual surface instead of being submerged all game, this wouldn't be a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,397
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
39,109 battles
41 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Or require submarines to travel more often on the actual surface instead of being submerged all game, this wouldn't be a problem.

I agree. I dont understand how you can recharge batteries while underwater....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25
[N9PTS]
Members
222 posts
605 battles
9 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

We are at a pivotal moment in the game...

 

 

 

 

I saw that video you posted recently

way to be a stand-up guy reminds me of the good old days

if you're cool with every sometime we should play together

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,832
[PQUOD]
[PQUOD]
Members
5,078 posts
19,467 battles
56 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Or require submarines to travel more often on the actual surface instead of being submerged all game, this wouldn't be a problem.

That may happen to. I’m sure there will be adjustments to submarines almost guaranteed. I kind of see nerfs coming opposed to buffs. In the mean time I’m going to keep playing them. Just speaking for myself as of right now the biggest threat would be a good enemy submarine captain in a underwater duel. I want to get better at that. Plus farm the bot ships with better than random pay out. Elite commander XP, exchange coins, and I believe ship XP for ships you own already if you play them in that mode. 
So far I like driving the submarines.

Edited by Capt_Ahab1776

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58
[ICLAD]
[ICLAD]
Beta Testers
132 posts
14,953 battles
12 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I agree. I dont understand how you can recharge batteries while underwater....

The snorkel was developed to allow the sub to recharge air and electricity while technically underwater but even that was done at periscope depth which seems to be "on the surface" in this game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,145
[A-I-M]
Members
4,084 posts
15,213 battles
9 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

Dear WG, Don’t Mess Subs Up

I dunno...

1. Dear Jack, leave the knives at home and give the “professional ladies” a pass, fer cryin’ out loud!

2. Dear Jeffrey, don’t eat those, and repeat after me: “People are friends, not food.”

3. Dear WG, Don’t Mess Subs Up
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
512 posts
15,408 battles
7 hours ago, enderland07 said:

I wish WG would have incentivized the mode more. Some ideas:

  • Rental T6 BB/CA premiums
  • Mission chains to permanently earn them (maybe 100 wins or something)
  • Nominal steel amounts per game

Anything to help make them more beneficial for veteran players to play so that the games were more normal.

The queue on the first day was nearly all surface ships; now it's nearly all subs/CVs. Neither of those are particularly useful for WG.

I personally found the mode completely boring for all ships very quickly, because playing glorified coop (with 5 bots every game) is just not a fun experience. I was unlucky and didn't get subs until the second to last day and that basically meant I was unable to play against any real battleship/cruiser players as every game was human subs/CVs/destroyers and the gameplay was completely messed up. 

That and not have clan battles and ranked during the testing people are getting tired no time to relax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
590 posts
5,040 battles

Thanks to XP boost, I got my Sinop unlocked but there is now little incentive for me to continue playing BBs in Sub Battles. I have no other Tier 6 BBs available to grind up to Tier 7 and getting 3 Back-to-school camos aren't going to make me continue. Why? Last night, the games were going the full 20 minutes and I must have lost 5+ games trying to get three wins. Not worth it for 3 stupid camos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,066
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
4,326 posts
12,980 battles
6 hours ago, Airacobra said:

The snorkel was developed to allow the sub to recharge air and electricity while technically underwater but even that was done at periscope depth which seems to be "on the surface" in this game.

The snorkel was a German innovation that wasn't available until post war; due to everyone pilfering german technology.  Even then, the sub had to travel at slower than usual speeds for the sake of the masts.

WW2 submarines were surface combatants with the ability to submerge until the early 50s; even after the GUPPY program. 

6 hours ago, Capt_Ahab1776 said:

In the mean time I’m going to keep playing them. 

By all means do meanwhile I'll keep watching submarine replays until i get my hands on one. Given homing torpedoes did exist and used by both sides i don't have a problem with them; i do have a problem with homing torpedoes bypassing torpedo defenses. 

This is a major problem since homing torpedoes currently travel too fast, and reload too fast to do so much damag. Especially against USN BBs.

Submarines should have a two torpedo option: homing and straight run; one fast and short ranged, and one slow and long range.

Dive times are also a problem and should be a balancing factor for subs. Just like snorkels and torpedoes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×