Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Koreta

Submarine Pre-work: Reforging a Flawed Implementation into a Balanced Class

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

0
[RNM99]
Beta Testers
6 posts
2,474 battles

Going to keep this as short as I can.

Submarine game play has fundamental problems that can be fixed with a few relatively simple tweaks:

  1. Revise the torpedo armament into two types:
    1. Slow, guided, weaker, more nimble torpedoes. For fighting other subs, destroyers, and other smaller ships, and should only tickle heavier vessels. Damage should be heavily reduced by torpedo protection. Remove the keel buster mechanic.
    2. Fast, unguided, powerful, deep water torpedoes. For fighting heavy cruisers, battleships, aircraft carriers, and larger vessels. These should reward intelligent decision making, positioning, and target selection. They should have a longer arming time before doing damage, and are only usable on the surface or from periscope depth. They also should hurt a whole lot. Lighter ships and other submarines will be completely immune to this weapon.
    3. Swapping between these two types should take a long time (over 30 seconds, less than a minute). Sub skippers will need to decide: do I prepare for smaller, faster targets, or slower and heavier ones?
  2. Subs vs. Other Ships:
    1. Every vessel should be able to damage a submarine in some way, but some can be better at it than others:
      1. All ships (except subs) receive depth charges. Destroyers and light cruisers get three charges on a short cooldown. Heavy cruisers get two charges on a longer cooldown. Battleships, battle cruisers, and carriers get one charge on the longest cooldown.
      2. High explosive shells and bombs should *slightly* damage a submarine at periscope depth through the concussive force, to punish a submerged submarine being spotted and potentially dissuading their attack run.
      3. Submarines can fight other submarines with short range, slow, guided torpedoes (much like they currently do).
  3. Diving and Surfacing:
    1. Re-introduce periscope depth, and allow players to actually see out of their periscope at this depth. (Why can't we do this right now? Attacking a silhouette from underwater is somewhat confusing.)
    2. Diving from the surface or surfacing from periscope depth should take the longest, and the submarine should be vulnerable to damage from shells while this is occurring.
    3. Diving/surfacing from periscope depth to deeper depths should be quicker.

These changes will hopefully introduce more opportunities for counter-play, provide more compelling decision making, and reinforce the high-risk, high-reward game play that the class is intended to provide. Let me know your thoughts, or pitch alternative suggestions if you have them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[PVE]
Members
5,239 posts
22,432 battles
1 hour ago, Koreta said:

Going to keep this as short as I can.

Submarine game play has fundamental problems that can be fixed with a few relatively simple tweaks:

  1. Revise the torpedo armament into two types:
    1. Slow, guided, weaker, more nimble torpedoes. For fighting other subs, destroyers, and other smaller ships, and should only tickle heavier vessels. Damage should be heavily reduced by torpedo protection. Remove the keel buster mechanic.
    2. Fast, unguided, powerful, deep water torpedoes. For fighting heavy cruisers, battleships, aircraft carriers, and larger vessels. These should reward intelligent decision making, positioning, and target selection. They should have a longer arming time before doing damage, and are only usable on the surface or from periscope depth. They also should hurt a whole lot. Lighter ships and other submarines will be completely immune to this weapon.
    3. Swapping between these two types should take a long time (over 30 seconds, less than a minute). Sub skippers will need to decide: do I prepare for smaller, faster targets, or slower and heavier ones?
  2. Subs vs. Other Ships:
    1. Every vessel should be able to damage a submarine in some way, but some can be better at it than others:
      1. All ships (except subs) receive depth charges. Destroyers and light cruisers get three charges on a short cooldown. Heavy cruisers get two charges on a longer cooldown. Battleships, battle cruisers, and carriers get one charge on the longest cooldown.
      2. High explosive shells and bombs should *slightly* damage a submarine at periscope depth through the concussive force, to punish a submerged submarine being spotted and potentially dissuading their attack run.
      3. Submarines can fight other submarines with short range, slow, guided torpedoes (much like they currently do).
  3. Diving and Surfacing:
    1. Re-introduce periscope depth, and allow players to actually see out of their periscope at this depth. (Why can't we do this right now? Attacking a silhouette from underwater is somewhat confusing.)
    2. Diving from the surface or surfacing from periscope depth should take the longest, and the submarine should be vulnerable to damage from shells while this is occurring.
    3. Diving/surfacing from periscope depth to deeper depths should be quicker.

These changes will hopefully introduce more opportunities for counter-play, provide more compelling decision making, and reinforce the high-risk, high-reward game play that the class is intended to provide. Let me know your thoughts, or pitch alternative suggestions if you have them!

The implementation is not yet flawed as it has not actually been implemented yet...the mode is a test mode & making ships invulnerable to most attacks whyole in testing (example CVs 0.8.0) is an easy way to actually get players to try them out in the test mode so they can get test data on the working mechanics in comparison to a lot of different skill levels instead of just the few players that were involved in the past (off the main server) test modes.

I (no insider data...just a hunch) expect to see more ASW countermeasures for subs implemented in the test servers (while still keeping the ASW light) so more people will be able to test them & give more data before massive ASW is implemented to balance them out more.

This is only the 1st wave of open testing...but it's still testing & nothing is flawed until it is actually released in the random mode on the main server.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[RNM99]
Beta Testers
6 posts
2,474 battles
19 minutes ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

The implementation is not yet flawed as it has not actually been implemented yet...the mode is a test mode & making ships invulnerable to most attacks whyole in testing (example CVs 0.8.0) is an easy way to actually get players to try them out in the test mode so they can get test data on the working mechanics in comparison to a lot of different skill levels instead of just the few players that were involved in the past (off the main server) test modes.

I (no insider data...just a hunch) expect to see more ASW countermeasures for subs implemented in the test servers (while still keeping the ASW light) so more people will be able to test them & give more data before massive ASW is implemented to balance them out more.

This is only the 1st wave of open testing...but it's still testing & nothing is flawed until it is actually released in the random mode on the main server.

I profoundly disagree with not referring to something as a flawed implementation simply because it's not widely available in random battles yet. You can (and should) refer to a flawed implementation of a model in testing as such so that said flaws can be fixed before being deployed to the larger game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[PVE]
Members
5,239 posts
22,432 battles
26 minutes ago, Koreta said:

I profoundly disagree with not referring to something as a flawed implementation simply because it's not widely available in random battles yet. You can (and should) refer to a flawed implementation of a model in testing as such so that said flaws can be fixed before being deployed to the larger game.

 

More proper wording would probably be "flawed concept" per the title of your OP as "implemented in testing" is sort of a contradiction in terms...it wasn't referred to as implemented on the PTS or any of the separate sub testing servers & shouldn't be here because despite the use of the words "not widely available in random battles" it is not at all available in random battles as it hasn't been implemented because it is still in testing...

Although I'll admit to improperly stating...

1 hour ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

...but it's still testing & nothing is flawed until it is actually released in the random mode on the main server.

...as it doesn't need to be released in random battles to be flawed...but implemented does refer to things that have been released in their final form as opposed to still being in a testing phase (or in terms of programs/laws already voted & approved as opposed to still being voted on).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[FUR-A]
[FUR-A]
Beta Testers
17 posts
4,858 battles

Ok, here is my 2-cents worth as a battleship captain who has switched to subs.

1. Destroyers are still lethal and if one catches your scent it is extremely hard to get away and it is damned near impossible to torpedo them at any sort of distance.
2. The homing torpedoes that everyone is making a big song and dance about can be easily countered if you are paying attention
3. It is extremely satisfying to annoy DDs with sudden swarms of torpedoes just like they have been doing to every other ship class with stealth torpedo swarms for years (and boy do DD players like to complain about it
4. Subs are actually fun to play and add a new dynamic to the game that makes it challenging and fun, especially doing the 'dance of death' against other submarines, if you and your opponent are reasonably skilled it can drag on for half the match.

Subs are easy to defeat once you know what you are doing but expecting half of the WoWs community to actually put in the effort to learn new things is a wasted hope. These are the same people who complained about the carriers, complained about cruisers getting smokescreens, complained that battleships were too nimble and now they are complaining about subs. I do agree that all ships should have some sort of ASW capability but I think that it is everything else that needs to adapt to the subs rather than nerf the hell out of subs to appease everyone else. And most of those complaining  i find have not even gone into the sub mode to see what it is like fighting against them.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2 posts
1,469 battles

I think subs are way over due and much needed due to the power house of a BB. But I agree that a BB needs something to combat a sub. What about mines? In WW2 BB would set mine fields to combat subs and it helped. I also think depth charges should be exploded at a set depth and mines could be as well. Make cruisers the only ones who can remove mines. Last I would make depth charges on planes. 2 planes 2 charges with shallow depth only 0-30. I thinks subs are great for the over all ship battle. Good Job!

Last make German subs able to dive 100 m instead of max 80 m, due to Germans having the deepest depth, make it where depth charges can't hit at that depth but mines can. 

Edited by Sea2turtle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
32 posts
417 battles
On 6/6/2020 at 9:09 PM, Koreta said:

Going to keep this as short as I can.

Submarine game play has fundamental problems that can be fixed with a few relatively simple tweaks:

  1. Revise the torpedo armament into two types:
    1. Slow, guided, weaker, more nimble torpedoes. For fighting other subs, destroyers, and other smaller ships, and should only tickle heavier vessels. Damage should be heavily reduced by torpedo protection. Remove the keel buster mechanic.
    2. Fast, unguided, powerful, deep water torpedoes. For fighting heavy cruisers, battleships, aircraft carriers, and larger vessels. These should reward intelligent decision making, positioning, and target selection. They should have a longer arming time before doing damage, and are only usable on the surface or from periscope depth. They also should hurt a whole lot. Lighter ships and other submarines will be completely immune to this weapon.
    3. Swapping between these two types should take a long time (over 30 seconds, less than a minute). Sub skippers will need to decide: do I prepare for smaller, faster targets, or slower and heavier ones?
  2. Subs vs. Other Ships:
    1. Every vessel should be able to damage a submarine in some way, but some can be better at it than others:
      1. All ships (except subs) receive depth charges. Destroyers and light cruisers get three charges on a short cooldown. Heavy cruisers get two charges on a longer cooldown. Battleships, battle cruisers, and carriers get one charge on the longest cooldown.
      2. High explosive shells and bombs should *slightly* damage a submarine at periscope depth through the concussive force, to punish a submerged submarine being spotted and potentially dissuading their attack run.
      3. Submarines can fight other submarines with short range, slow, guided torpedoes (much like they currently do).
  3. Diving and Surfacing:
    1. Re-introduce periscope depth, and allow players to actually see out of their periscope at this depth. (Why can't we do this right now? Attacking a silhouette from underwater is somewhat confusing.)
    2. Diving from the surface or surfacing from periscope depth should take the longest, and the submarine should be vulnerable to damage from shells while this is occurring.
    3. Diving/surfacing from periscope depth to deeper depths should be quicker.

These changes will hopefully introduce more opportunities for counter-play, provide more compelling decision making, and reinforce the high-risk, high-reward game play that the class is intended to provide. Let me know your thoughts, or pitch alternative suggestions if you have them!

I like much of this. I also did a 4thread series on a complete rework I think you would enjoy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,123 posts
15,315 battles
On 6/6/2020 at 7:09 PM, Koreta said:

All ships (except subs) receive depth charges

Give them to subs too. When they submerge, the charges go off:cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,123 posts
15,315 battles
15 hours ago, Redtailfox said:

4. Subs are actually fun to play and add a new dynamic to the game that makes it challenging and fun, especially doing the 'dance of death' against other submarines, if you and your opponent are reasonably skilled it can drag on for half the match.

The question is not so much of whether subs are fun to play but rather are they fun to play against. In the current sub mode lots of players want to play sub based on the queue numbers. Very few want to play against them in spite of the incentives WG has provided. The non-sub slots are almost all filled by bots. That pretty much answers the question.

A better answer than giving the big ships depth-charges would be to create a new ammo choice for 200+ mm guns. These would be short range (8K or less), derpy as hell (slow shell velocity) and useless against surface ships ( they shatter, even against a surfaced sub). They would act more like depth charges and be better at damaging submerged subs. This way CAs and BBs still get to use their guns to kill things and don't need to drive over the target to do it,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
145
[_BDA_]
Members
230 posts
3,876 battles
On 6/6/2020 at 9:09 PM, Koreta said:
  1. Subs vs. Other Ships:
    1. Every vessel should be able to damage a submarine in some way, but some can be better at it than others:
      1. All ships (except subs) receive depth charges. Destroyers and light cruisers get three charges on a short cooldown. Heavy cruisers get two charges on a longer cooldown. Battleships, battle cruisers, and carriers get one charge on the longest cooldown.
      2. High explosive shells and bombs should *slightly* damage a submarine at periscope depth through the concussive force, to punish a submerged submarine being spotted and potentially dissuading their attack run.
      3. Submarines can fight other submarines with short range, slow, guided torpedoes (much like they currently do).

Battleships and heavy cruisers should not have depth charges... especially since a lot of cruisers don't even carry torpedoes.  Instead, they should have ASW aircraft if they mount a catapult, which should be just about all of them.  If they don't, then perhaps a mod that replaces a few anti-aircraft guns to install one on top of a turret.  These aircraft would be automatic like a carrier's fighter defense.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256
Members
386 posts

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

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
0 posts
On 6/7/2020 at 5:42 PM, Redtailfox said:

1. Destroyers are still lethal and if one catches your scent it is extremely hard to get away and it is damned near impossible to torpedo them at any sort of distance.
2. The homing torpedoes that everyone is making a big song and dance about can be easily countered if you are paying attention
3. It is extremely satisfying to annoy DDs with sudden swarms of torpedoes just like they have been doing to every other ship class with stealth torpedo swarms for years (and boy do DD players like to complain about it
4. Subs are actually fun to play and add a new dynamic to the game that makes it challenging and fun, especially doing the 'dance of death' against other submarines, if you and your opponent are reasonably skilled it can drag on for half the match.

Subs are easy to defeat once you know what you are doing but expecting half of the WoWs community to actually put in the effort to learn new things is a wasted hope. These are the same people who complained about the carriers, complained about cruisers getting smokescreens, complained that battleships were too nimble and now they are complaining about subs. I do agree that all ships should have some sort of ASW capability but I think that it is everything else that needs to adapt to the subs rather than nerf the hell out of subs to appease everyone else. And most of those complaining  i find have not even gone into the sub mode to see what it is like fighting against them.

 

Bless this comment.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
0 posts
On 6/8/2020 at 9:18 AM, michael_zahnle said:

Instead, they should have ASW aircraft if they mount a catapult, which should be just about all of them. 

That's a great idea!  I did not think of that before.  

So basically, WG could add a plane consumable (separate from the Spotting and Fighter consumable slot) that a BB or a CA could use if they are being attacked by a submarine.  

That way, for all the ships that do NOT get depth charges, they at least have an effective way to counter subs that are submerged and cannot be shot at or rammed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
0 posts
13 hours ago, nhf said:

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

Do you have a crystal ball helping you predict the future?

 

....no.  I disagree with you.  DDs will still be played be enough players after submarines are finally introduced into Random Battle (in fact, the incentive to play DD might increase because of submarines' introduction).  

As for "DDs will be spotted early", you forget that many DDs still have smoke consumables that they can use to hide themselves from enemy subs. Only if a sub is within the guaranteed 2 km sight range can a DD absolutely be detected while in smoke (but why would a sub even want to be that close to a destroyer when destroyers have lethal depth charges?).  

 

I am not ruling out that you are entirely wrong....just that there are reasons to prove that DDs are not so dead of a class.  And also, until the submarines are introduced, we will not know if DDs will be a "dead class" or not.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[PVE]
Members
5,239 posts
22,432 battles
On 6/9/2020 at 3:07 PM, Admiral_Mudkip said:

That's a great idea!  I did not think of that before.  

So basically, WG could add a plane consumable (separate from the Spotting and Fighter consumable slot) that a BB or a CA could use if they are being attacked by a submarine.  

That way, for all the ships that do NOT get depth charges, they at least have an effective way to counter subs that are submerged and cannot be shot at or rammed. 

Unfortunately if ASW planes are introduced the ASW will probably be an alternate choice between the other planes as opposed to an extra choice...but maybe not... we'll see.

On 6/9/2020 at 3:11 PM, Admiral_Mudkip said:

Do you have a crystal ball helping you predict the future?

 

....no.  I disagree with you.  DDs will still be played be enough players after submarines are finally introduced into Random Battle (in fact, the incentive to play DD might increase because of submarines' introduction).  

As for "DDs will be spotted early", you forget that many DDs still have smoke consumables that they can use to hide themselves from enemy subs. Only if a sub is within the guaranteed 2 km sight range can a DD absolutely be detected while in smoke (but why would a sub even want to be that close to a destroyer when destroyers have lethal depth charges?).  

 

I am not ruling out that you are entirely wrong....just that there are reasons to prove that DDs are not so dead of a class.  And also, until the submarines are introduced, we will not know if DDs will be a "dead class" or not.  

Subs can detect DDs in their smoke w/their pings...or at least that is what I've been reading on the forums about them.

The pings are like a radar/hydro in that respect...but not sure of it's range.

I haven't been able to play in awhile but that has been my understanding from what I've been reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
0 posts
17 hours ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

Unfortunately if ASW planes are introduced the ASW will probably be an alternate choice between the other planes as opposed to an extra choice...but maybe not... we'll see.

Subs can detect DDs in their smoke w/their pings...or at least that is what I've been reading on the forums about them.

The pings are like a radar/hydro in that respect...but not sure of it's range.

I haven't been able to play in awhile but that has been my understanding from what I've been reading.

From my understanding while playing in Submarine Battles (both in submarines and in destroyers), you can still hide in smoke (as a destroyer) from a submarine, and the submarine can only detect you if they do get a ping on you BEFORE you go undetected and if the submarine is within the 2 km proximity range (or the range that a destroyer can be detected while firing guns in smoke).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407
[PVE]
Members
5,239 posts
22,432 battles
4 hours ago, Admiral_Mudkip said:

From my understanding while playing in Submarine Battles (both in submarines and in destroyers), you can still hide in smoke (as a destroyer) from a submarine, and the submarine can only detect you if they do get a ping on you BEFORE you go undetected and if the submarine is within the 2 km proximity range (or the range that a destroyer can be detected while firing guns in smoke).

Ah...so they have to ping you before you smoke...didn't get that before.

Thanx for the clarification...the way some people were talking about it I thought they could ping them once they were already smoked.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,087
[CVA16]
Members
5,123 posts
15,315 battles
On 6/6/2020 at 7:09 PM, Koreta said:

Lighter ships and other submarines will be completely immune to this weapon.

I would alter this to not damaging surfaced subs. A sub at periscope depth or a notch deeper is exactly where a deep water torp would hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×