Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Capt_Ahab1776

Submarines as is, biggest threat in game

44 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

178
[KOBK]
Members
483 posts
5,558 battles

The difference between bb vs dd and bb vs ss is that you have to be more smart than the dd and you can skin her. Against ss, you cant do nothing.

Stealth torpedo are a problem? Yes, and you can avoid them by not going in straightline. But sub torps can also be guided so you can "dodge" the original launch line but still be hit by the guidance if the ss is good.

I see 2 possible solutions:
A) give every ship ASW (dont know, make the planes in the bbs to have dept charges and they have to active it to drop in the vecinity)
b) remove guidance on torpedos from ss. Make them the same as a dd. And remove that "ignores torpedo defenses" it makes no sense at all since the torpedo def was made to *duh* reduce the damage from torpedos. Its some kind of magic torpedo?

 

Edited by Nabucodonosor21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,936
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,326 posts
14,923 battles
41 minutes ago, Nabucodonosor21 said:

The difference between bb vs dd and bb vs ss is that you have to be more smart than the dd and you can skin her. Against ss, you cant do nothing.

Stealth torpedo are a problem? Yes, and you can avoid them by not going in straightline. But sub torps can also be guided so you can "dodge" the original launch line but still be hit by the guidance if the ss is good.

I see 2 possible solutions:
A) give every ship ASW (dont know, make the planes in the bbs to have dept charges and they have to active it to drop in the vecinity)
b) remove guidance on torpedos from ss. Make them the same as a dd. And remove that "ignores torpedo defenses" it makes no sense at all since the torpedo def was made to *duh* reduce the damage from torpedos. Its some kind of magic torpedo?

 

A) The ASW plane consumable has been suggested by many players but it needs to have a relatively short cool down. This consumable needs to go to all cruisers that do not have ASW, BB's and CV's if they don't get an ASW squadron. The consumable would make several passes on the sub in a similar manner to how DD's & CL's do now but with less ordnance per pass.

B) Yeah, the wire guided torps have to go or make homing torpedoes an option but they would be very slow and only one torpedo can be in the water at one time. While they did have acoustic homing torpedoes near the end of the war and their sole purpose was to cripple escorts by hitting them in the propeller/rudder area and it took the RN a whopping two weeks after first running into them to develop a working counter measure.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
178
[KOBK]
Members
483 posts
5,558 battles
9 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

A) The ASW plane consumable has been suggested by many players but it needs to have a relatively short cool down. This consumable needs to go to all cruisers that do not have ASW, BB's and CV's if they don't get an ASW squadron. The consumable would make several passes on the sub in a similar manner to how DD's & CL's do now but with less ordnance per pass.

B) Yeah, the wire guided torps have to go or make homing torpedoes an option but they would be very slow and only one torpedo can be in the water at one time. While they did have acoustic homing torpedoes near the end of the war and their sole purpose was to cripple escorts by hitting them in the propeller/rudder area and it took the RN a whopping two weeks after first running into them to develop a working counter measure.

Maybe add a third plane option which can only be used if observation/fighter is on cd and put an option to recall they if already active? This way you wont lose your spotter/defende and win some asw 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,454
[CVA16]
Members
6,441 posts
20,018 battles
2 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

And if a Stealth Torpedo DD let itself get spotted by a Battleship, they suck as a DD player.  A decent DD player will maintain that concealment advantage and there is only 1 possible BB in the game that has the speed to catch up:  Georgia.  Every other BB is too slow to overtake and spot a DD that knows how to maintain concealment.

But to get to that 1v1 late game scenario, the DD has to have run the gauntlet of other DDs, Cruisers and possibly aircraft (and subs in that sub mode),  any of which can spot and kill it. BBs kill plenty of DDs. DDs often die early deaths. Subs just have to play a bit cautiously until the opposing DDs are dead and then things get much easier. The remaining "threats are pretty much non-threats to any non-sucky sub player. From what I have seen, subs rival CVs for the ability to survive until late game, be the last ships standing. Resulting in those exciting as watching paint dry finishes where the opposing subs try futilely to kill each other and the timer slowly runs out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,417 battles

The extraordinarily low detection range of a submerged sub makes spotting them as they slip through gaps VERY hard. FAR, far harder than DDs. 

And given the very limited range of ASW, what exactly are nearby ships supposed to do if someone spots a sub?  It's not like when you spot a DD, and everyone can open up on him.  Subs are only vulnerable up close and personal, and that puts the ASW-owning ship at severe risk of getting deleted by the sub's team, while the ASW ship's teammates are practically useless to kill the sub.

 

Easiest tactic I've seen: 

Sub runs up to cap submerged, gets to edge of cap.  Sees cap being contested.  Sub tells team to get ready (in the same way you do with Radar) - sub then surfaces, spots DD (and MIGHT get spotted themselves, MAYBE, if  the sub is careless, but overall, unlikely, given the 1km+ concealment edge even on the surface), and DD gets deleted almost immediately. Sub then submerges.  Takes 10 seconds, and it's not hard to avoid getting shot at during that time, as the DD's team would have to have their guns trained exactly where the sub is.

The surface/spot/submerge tactic is EXTREMELY effective.  There's no counter, either, as the sub just drops down and becomes invulnerable.  The enemy team can radar to keep the sub off the surface, but otherwise, what can they do?  Hydro doesn't have the range, and the sub can still spot stuff while submerged.

 

The entire class is just broken beyond repair. It should SOLELY be reserved for special events, and NEVER see Random, because there's no possible fix, and it breaks everything in the game.

Edited by LAnybody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
329
Members
449 posts

DDs are a dead class of ship if submarines are ever fully introduced into random play.  Submarine players who play to win, will focus on spotting early.  Meaning, DDs will be spotted early, killed by HE spamming, and submarines will then sail the map freely to cap and torps what's left. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[POO69]
Beta Testers
81 posts
12,334 battles

I have been playing submarine games almost exclusively since they came to the live server - submarines themselves only a few times (to verify how much I suck at them - dive/surface/maneuver/ping/shoot/ping etc while maintaining situational awareness and keeping track of what my team was doing - too much for my feeble W-A-S-D gamer powers.  But I have had a good time with surface ships, primarily destroyers and ASW-capable cruisers.  I even started up the French destroyer line just to see how the Guepard would do.

Smoke as a refuge for destroyers (and cruisers that have it), as a concept, was battered by proliferation of radar and longer range hydro.  Subs are just another nail in the coffin.  So it makes sense to me to concentrate on destroyer lines that do not have smoke, but have some compensating features. . . I.E. the French and "Pan-European".  So, some points:

  1. For the love of God, give the French destroyers some AA.  (And the Gallant and Icarus for that matter, the only ones worse than the Guepard at Tier VI.  But smoke can work for them as long as a sub is not in range.)  There is so much fiction in the game already, pretending the French got a chance to plaster Oerlikons and Bofors on every available square foot of weather deck, as other navies did, is not a stretch.  Not too many carriers in sub games - I got focused by a carrier in one battle but the Guepard is so tough that I managed to finish off a battleship and sink two subs before I inevitably got rocketed and bombed to death.  AA was firing almost the whole time and I got 2 planes, 6K or so plane damage, for the effort.
  2. Subs are difficult to master - I have watched as a sub failed to land torpedoes on a battleship 2 km away.  Torpedoes flying in all directions, no hits.  I have also taken torpedoes down the throat coming in for a depth charge attack in a destroyer.  The disparity between the sub players who know how to play (2-3 out of 6) and those who are completely baffled and bewildered (3-4 out of 6) is immense.  The player base is slowly improving, but  the fact that subs are presently "balanced" by this disparity in skill will make it difficult for the developers to make them balanced in fact.
  3. We need surface ships to play the submarine games.  The bots shoot pretty well but make really bad positioning choices.  
  4. Battleships and non-ASW cruisers (heavy? don't know how the choices were made).  Other than modifying the present ping = citadel mechanic, I don't see a lot of options.  Other than actual team play, but that is not much of a solution.  As a group, we are not much inclined to team play.
  5. A minor point - consider activating deck guns on subs.  I had a game where my side had nothing left but two subs, and the other side had just one battleship left.  Who wisely motored over to our CAP and capped out, winning the game.  Our subs were way too far away - if they had deck guns they could at least reset the CAP.  (I assume anyone that had a notion to engage any surface ship in the game with a single 88 mm - 105 mm deck gun would soon find out what a bad idea that was.  Deck guns were for defenseless merchant ships.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
On 6/5/2020 at 12:37 AM, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Well, if your team was to have the kind of situation where DDs & CLs (ASW ships) are dead, a BB was just as impotent to free-roaming Stealth Torpedo DDs as they are against a Submarine.

 

What is Normandie, Arizona, New Mexico, etc. going to do to beat Stealth Torpedo DDs if their own DD screen is gone?

 

Not a d*mn thing but run.

 

Now imagine this in Tier X where there are some truly mighty BBs there.  What is Yamato, GK, Montana, Conqueror, Kremlin, etc. are going to do against Daring, Shimakaze, Gearing, Z-52 if their own DD screen, Radar Cruisers are dead?

 

Not a d*mn thing but run.

 

People act like the threat of Submarines is something new.  It isn't.  A DD stalking a BB in stealth is just as dangerous.  If the BB doesn't have help to find that DD, there is literally nothing the BB can do but try to run.

This is nothing new.

 

I remember a while back playing Conqueror and was having a helluva game.  I'm pretty decent with her, confident.  But a mere Tier VIII Benson somehow made its way past my screen and was attacking me for the cap.  I tried being creative with my maneuvering feigning retreat then push in to try to catch the DD, but he wasn't falling for that and he maintained stealth.  He kept on chucking torpedoes.  This went on for a while and he forced me out of the cap and seized it.  Nothing more I could do but run.  Had I tried to stay eventually he'd nail me with torps.

Conqueror Mega Healz.

Conquror's notorious 419mm x12 with Mega HE shells.

Useless against a Stealth Torpedo Tier VIII Benson if I didn't have help in finding that DD.

I was thinking along the same lines as you. 

 

All those who are already decrying "submarines as the most broken thing in the game"  are overexaggerating in my opinion. 

 

Firstly, subs are STILL in development.  Secondly, while yes if your team loses their DDs and CLs you are very vulnerable to enemy subs, it is pretty much the same thing if you lose your DDs and CLs and the enemy that is left are just DDs.  So subs and DDs both are stealthy threats.  

Thirdly, BBs and CAs are not entirely at the mercy of submarines.  You can still shoot at submarines (or ram them) if they are at the surface or at periscope depth.  Subs will be at surface/periscope depth in order to recharge their batteries, which actually makes them vulnerable to all other surface ship attacks.  If WG realizes this, then they should remove the recharging underwater ability that subs get by staying stationary or at 1/4 speed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[POO69]
Beta Testers
81 posts
12,334 battles

Adding to the Admiral's point:  Just finished a game in the Dallas - depth-charged one sub (who wisely went deep and survived to be finished off by the bot Dallas on the team) then caught a less wise sub player on the surface and deleted him with guns. 

I would still like to see more human surface ship players in the submarine game to give Wargaming the best information for the eternal game of nerfs-n'-buffs.  There is a lot of credits and XP in it, at least for the first 7 games of the day.  I re-purchased the Dallas specifically for submarine games (it is a pretty good ship - I just was not playing it right when I sold it).  I recently purchased the Seattle (having unlocked it a year or two ago) and have been using submarine games to gain the Free XP and Credits to fit it out.  Meanwhile I am training up the captain for it in the Dallas.

For those who want to roll the dice and take a surface ship into a sub game, Radio Location can be pretty important, particularly if you don't have built-in "Hydrophones"  (all destroyers, I believe, except for Vasteras) or the "Hydroacoustic Search" consumable.  More Wargaming magic:

  1. Apparently you can do a "Hydroacoustic Search" without having "Hydrophones".
  2. Submarines cannot transmit radio underwater (still true today, except for ultra-long wave) but you can still get a rough bearing with Radio Location.

But in a game where hydro can hear through islands and radar can see through mountains, it would be churlish to complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
478
[CAZA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
527 posts
6,891 battles

My biggest concern is some classes being unable to fight back against submarines altogether, I almost won in a 3v1 scenario with my Mutsu against subs, but only because I kept dodging somehow and two of their subs, for reasons unknown, decided to surface. The remaining dude just kept being underwater spamming torps until he finally scored the hits he needed to kill me, such fun!

Where is the fun when I take my battered Leander (Because you know, you take damage by engaging other ships like DDs and CLs) up against TWO subs with BB support? because of course they can keep you permanently spotted while your best hope is to get hydro and your torpedo-dodging skills ready... I got one but the enemy Fuso and Dunkerque finally found my citadel after I rushed for a all-or-nothing depth charge run on the remaining sub.

They don't fit into the game, early game they're just bothering everyone with their silly spotting range (which they shouldn't, at least, subs should NOT spot for the team, only for themselves, unless they are on the surface), late game it's just like Tier IV battles with double CV per team, it ends up being whoever can survive vs all subs intact. I know other classes with get ASW, Roma for example has depth charges on it's model, but what can it do anyways? Rush a submarine with your huge ship, BB mobility and for what exactly? minimal damage because the sub decides to go full depth? counterplay is risky and terrible at best, you can counterplay any DD with any BB, you can bait his torpedoes, you can get into spotting range and let your main battery/secondaries do the job, submarines will dive deep and there it goes, have fun not being able to spot him....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46
[ARGNT]
Beta Testers
79 posts
6,574 battles

My thoughts.  Not much new here really.  Your mileage may vary.

Gameplay...

Submarines, by their very nature, will cause major changes to the game.  Subs depend on stealth.  Any stealth mechanic (TDs and Arty in tanks; DDs and - for different reasons - Carriers in Warships) tends to generate hate and discontent.  Whether balanced or not, no one likes to face an opponent they can't see and/or retaliate against.

The fact that subs are fragile makes little difference.  They're essentially invulnerable to the majority of ships currently in play - battleships, most cruisers and carriers.  Subs can submerge, rendering them invulnerable to surface fire.  That they can run submerged for long periods of time is fine; real WW2 subs could stay down for hours.  However, it's frustrating to see an 'impossible to hit' marker on a sub.  It's only slightly less frustrating than having them disappear to ships which aren't running hydro, which would be more 'realistic'.

If subs are so fragile that they're easily one-shotted, sub players will rightly be frustrated.  That's no fun for any skipper. 

The number of ships with ASW is still out of whack.  Many ships (mostly light cruisers) with visible depth charge racks still can't do anything about subs.  Yet if ASW is available to more ships it will likewise change the balance, leaving sub skippers frustrated (again). 

Sub advocates are already complaining on the forums about the low survivability of subs.  I for one haven't seen it.  In my experience subs are usually the majority of survivors at the end of a match.  It's the stealth.

Acoustic torps for submarines is already generating frustration among skippers of surface ships and carriers with torps.  While a sympathize, acoustic torps were largely employed by subs historically.  To compensate, acoustic sub torps probably should have their damage reduced (further) to compensate for their current high accuracy.  Which will, of course, frustrate sub skippers, who already feel their boats ('boat' is the proper term for a sub) suffer from low survivability.

 

Historically speaking...

Subs were rarely used in fleet actions in either of the World Wars.  They were almost exclusively commerce raiders.  Trying to force them into a fleet action role is... well... disturbing.

Subs are way, way too fast when submerged.  A US Gato class sub could manage 21 knots on the surface (the same as those US standard BBs everyone complains about) and a whopping 9 knots submerged.  This speed is essential for making subs playable in fleet actions, but it's a horrific crime against reality.  No one in their right mind would play a vessel with 9 knot submerged speed, regardless of how good any rage-inducing stealth mechanic was.

Realism would result in a completely different game of course - a slow tense game, stalking targets for hours, launching a torp spread and getting the heck out of dodge (in slow motion) as escorts attempt to depth charge you into oblivion.  We're not even talking about air attack by long range ASW patrol planes, which was a major threat to U-boats.  Hardly viable in a fleet action.

There's a reason the survival rate among U-boat crews in WWII was around 25%.  Even the US, on the winning side and benefitting from air dominance, lost roughly 18% of it's deployed subs.  Read about the USS Tambor for some eye-opening details.

Acoustic torpedoes were not terribly successful historically.  When introduced the German T5 acoustic torpedo had to be launched within 400 yards of the target.  Between June and August 1943 the T5s were quite effective, but the Allies quickly employed 'noisemaker' countermeasures like Foxer and Fanfare which 'confused' acoustic torpedoes into running in circles, at the cost of making SONAR (hydroacoustic search) ineffective. Overall, the hit rate for the improved G7 series German acoustic torpedo was 77 hits out of roughly 700 fired (~11%). 

Of course, fleet units like heavy cruisers and BBs didn't use noisemakers during fleet actions.  But then, subs weren't deliberately employed during fleet actions.

We're not actually playing WW2 subs in WoWS, we're playing imaginary submersible rockets with magically accurate acoustic torpedoes.  While I accept that this is a game, not a simulation, changes that go so far beyond reality that sube in their current state alienate players (like myself) who are interested in a game APPROXIMATING historic vessels and battles.  It's the same issue players have with 'paper' ships, overly- 'stronk' Russian ships and the effectiveness/prominence of carrier rocket planes.

 

To sum up (aka TL;DR)

Funny thing, the changes Wargaming has instituted are NECESSARY to make subs viable in the fleet actions a WoWS match represents.  Sad things is, at this point they're no longer subs. 

The biggest problem from a gameplay perspective remain stealth.  Stealth always generates frustration in players that don't have access to it.  We should have learned this from our experiences with World of Tanks TD and Arty, and from World of Warships Carriers.  Stealth is the essential schtick of submarines.  It seems likely that no attempt to balance subs will be perceived as successful. 

Acoustic torpedo accuracy,  sub fragility and ASW are other issues that will impact every player's enjoyment of the game if subs are integrated as-is into mainstream fleet actions (random battles).  

While this is 'a game not a simulation', subs as currently implemented are yet another step away from history.  World of Warships has a significant number of players who are interested in the history behind the game; subs in their current state will tend to marginalize those players.

 

Recommendations...

I would recommend not trying to force subs into a fleet action role.  Given the nature of subs it will prove divisive to the community and alienate history-oriented players.  Create a separate set of scenarios that recreates tense wolfpack versus ASW/convoy.  Rework subs to approximate reality.  Rework ASW to be more involved and engaging.  It should have completely different pacing mission-specific mechanics.  It could easily be PVP, receiving the same rewards as regular random battles.  It could also have unique missions available.

 

My two cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[SFBG]
[SFBG]
Members
92 posts
18,077 battles

  I've seen the good points and the bad points made by both sides. What I can say is that Subs will change the way people will be playing any ship type. In Randoms, players will start having to play closer to other ships for protection and to protect. No more running away and leaving the BB's to fend for themselves. No more hiding your ships behind islands and hoping the rest of the team can pull a win while the others play a hiding game. No yet sure when Subs will be in clan battles but that would be more difficult because clan battles are played more to help each other focus on protecting your team mates. So, when I see many complaining that subs will make BB's fade away , I think that's wrong. I believe that subs bring into the game a change in thinking and make others play more together for protecting each other as Naval Battles were meant to be fought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,454
[CVA16]
Members
6,441 posts
20,018 battles
On 6/16/2020 at 9:42 AM, Arcolin06 said:

Of course, fleet units like heavy cruisers and BBs didn't use noisemakers during fleet actions.  But then, subs weren't deliberately employed during fleet actions.

I think the noise of a surface battle would suffice to confuse the hell out of an acoustic torpedo. Hydro too. Big booms tend to drown out faint engine noises.

Modern computer analyzed/assisted systems might be able to sort it out, but not pre-1950 stuff.

Edited by Sabot_100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,967 battles

I know this is a game but aircraft carriers and submarines are the 2 most threatening amphibious vehicles in the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12 posts
8,063 battles

There are several valid points and issues here.  

 

From a DD perspective, subs are easy kills.  If a DD wants to go sub hunting, it's one, two, three.    Roll up on them at 40 knots at either the 3-4 or 8-9 o'clock positions and depth charge them.   Boom, gone.  If they surface, your guns rip them apart.  Ram them too.

 

From a DD perspective, I love my Gearing as I go hunting helpless Yamato and Montana BBs.  No radar, I just keep 6 km out of sight and launch waves of torps at them.  Boom, gone.  

 

From a sub perspective, it's 11 knots, running out of air, battery and enemy CLs and DDs hunting me.   I can launch torps and get lucky, but they are easily avoidable in volleys of 2 and even when they hit are rarely devastating strikes.   Another sub is an equally potent enemy.   

 

From a BB perspective, "where the F' are the DDs to help me?"  

 

It isn't that subs are overpowered in any way, but that most players love their battleships and don't like nuisances like invisible DDs spitting torps, firing shells from smoke screens, dive bombers, torpedo bombers, rockets, or rapid fire cruisers raining HE fire bombs on them...and now subs lurking nearby without any DD support to find them.   

 

Subs are fun. the 3-D underwater effect is very interesting.  I even rammed another sub for a victory, but the damage a sub causes is low overall compared to other ships.  A raining fire CL piles up the damage, credits, score a lot faster than a sub lurking, spotting, and landing a couple torps on a BB that can easily take 6-10 before it's sunk.  I would surmise that a lot of kills from subs occur after a ship is already heavily damaged.

 

A semi-competent DD player is more than capable of sinking the best subs.   Change the role of DDs from capping zones to fleet protection.  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
198 posts
579 battles

I don't see a problem with Submarines, everyone's excuse is "Well in the right hands they will be OP" I mean a CV user in the right hands will have people scream hacks. Subs are not mobile tanks, yes they have stealth in the water but you also have a sub player on your team as well. The fact is this is really going to go down to the player .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5 posts
215 battles

I like playing the subs and wish they would hurry up and get them online for regular gaming as this has been dragging forever . Subs really did exist in the time period of the ships being played and contrary to some postings they are not really that powerful are are basically dead once discovered .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,352
[WORX]
Members
13,262 posts
20,124 battles

Bottom line.

Disproportional in game experience. 

It doesn't matter what ship class you choose to play. Fairness or fair in game play will always be in question...

This should not happen if the game was fair and balance... As we all know, the game is not calibrated for "fairness." in the ship class.

Subs will not change what I noted. Knowing WG, subs are going to be nerf to the bottom of the ocean to appease certain ship classes, instead of being fair.

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,936
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,326 posts
14,923 battles

The more I play the subs the more that they feel like slow DD's with a different mechanism for hiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×