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

My problems with submarines.

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Banned
120 posts
11,462 battles

Okay I will admit that I was not thrilled about submarines being added to the game because I already have enough torpedoes to dodge out of nowhere as it is with the DD's. As subs are now I hope they are never in random battles. There are four things that if they would change I might not mind them in the game. First, the homing torps are just stupid for era of ships they are representing and it's already difficult enough to dodge all the torps without them following me. Second, subs back then could NOT see ships beneath periscope depth, yes the could hear them but not see them so I think they should only be able to shoot torps at periscope depth or on the surface. Third CV's should be equipped with anti submarine squadrons. Lastly, subs should have a deck gun and a anti aircraft gun. Well that's my two cents on the subject.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,122
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,150 posts
4,345 battles

I agree, homing torps really seem unnecessary. I get they needed something to make up for the small spread, but homing torps seems a bit much. Probably other ways to make up the firepower.

The vision thing is an issue. Even with the announced vision nerf they can still spot things several kilometers away and be safe. I think they're ability to detect thing underwater should be almost none existent, unless they're at periscope depth or above they should be nearly completely reliant on the team for spotting. Otherwise they completely control the vision game, and that's a great way to make something OP.

I would guess that CVs will get ASW equipment, but right now they're just working on getting the basics down. Once they know how subs interact with surface vessels and planes it's relatively easy to stick depth charges on planes.

Deck guns, eh. Thing is it wouldn't matter. Subs usually only had one gun that would even be useful here in game, a 3in or 4in gun. That's going to be so small that the damage is negligible, so there's no need to model it. Same with AA, subs have less AA than the worst DD, and their guns are already worse than useless. So adding surface weapons, while historically accurate, would do nothing in game. Though again, I suspect this may be a smaller issue, and once the main issues are worked out subs may get working secondary and AA guns.

The recent update they announced seems to fix most of the issues, except the vision one. So they're getting closer. I think we're still a long way from seeing them as a regular thing, and even more from them in Randoms. 2020 was to be the Year of the Submarine, but it's not looking likely at this point.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25
[N9PTS]
Members
222 posts
605 battles
53 minutes ago, VonSchoenvorts said:

Okay I will admit that I was not thrilled about submarines being added to the game because I already have enough torpedoes to dodge out of nowhere as it is with the DD's. As subs are now I hope they are never in random battles. There are four things that if they would change I might not mind them in the game. First, the homing torps are just stupid for era of ships they are representing and it's already difficult enough to dodge all the torps without them following me. Second, subs back then could NOT see ships beneath periscope depth, yes the could hear them but not see them so I think they should only be able to shoot torps at periscope depth or on the surface. Third CV's should be equipped with anti submarine squadrons. Lastly, subs should have a deck gun and a anti aircraft gun. Well that's my two cents on the subject.

 

 I would also like to congratulate you on a very good job and a job well done you did all the research which I agree with

 

Most of what you said as when mostly right Even for historical standpoint

Edited by Number9Pounder
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[CLRN]
Members
609 posts
122 battles

Biggest problem with subs is them havin no counter at all. It incredibly easy to counter DDs which supposed to counter subs. Played all sub test versions. WG couldnt/didnt solve this issue. 

Its easy to solve tho.

1- Subs should be recharge their batteries only on surface.

2- There should be delay to surface or dive.

3- Sub spotting should work like radar spotting which means delay. 

4- Every class should have anti subs weapons.

5- splash damage radius of different gun calibers shouldnt be the same. For example if you shoot with 155mm guns HE, the splash damage radius/dept is 5,9m. If you shoot with 406mm guns HE, the splash damage radius/dept should be much more like 9 to 10m.

Edited by ghostbuster_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,933
[RLGN]
Members
16,240 posts
28,133 battles
40 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

I agree, homing torps really seem unnecessary. I get they needed something to make up for the small spread, but homing torps seems a bit much. Probably other ways to make up the firepower.

It’s called a torpedo lead guide.

You know, the established, functional mechanic that ships have been using for the last five years to land torpedo hits?

The mechanic that was used in the Halloween Sub events?

But, maybe WG just forgot about it.

That; or they’re so consumed with an apparent need to over complicate or gimmickize a new class that they just don’t care.

2 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

Biggest problem with subs is them havin no counter at all. It incredibly easy to counter DDs which supposed to counter subs. Played all sub test versions. WG couldnt/didnt solve this issue. 

For all the snark I expressed above, I think the announced changes did move things in a positive direction.

Not perfect by any means, and I agree that the homing torps are still a bit much, (as well as being wholly unnecessary,) but at least WG seems to have managed not to make things worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,946
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,342 posts
14,924 battles
34 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

It’s called a torpedo lead guide.

You know, the established, functional mechanic that ships have been using for the last five years to land torpedo hits?

The mechanic that was used in the Halloween Sub events?

But, maybe WG just forgot about it.

That; or they’re so consumed with an apparent need to over complicate or gimmickize a new class that they just don’t care.

For all the snark I expressed above, I think the announced changes did move things in a positive direction.

Not perfect by any means, and I agree that the homing torps are still a bit much, (as well as being wholly unnecessary,) but at least WG seems to have managed not to make things worse.

He was talking about the pinging which does turn them into homing torpedoes.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
470 posts
8,506 battles

Isn't the homing torpedo suppose to reflect the complex firing solutions they needed to calculate to get a torpedo to hit anything if fired by a submarine?  Its not like exactly like a surface launched torpedo or an air dropped torpedo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,946
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,342 posts
14,924 battles
7 minutes ago, ithekro said:

Isn't the homing torpedo suppose to reflect the complex firing solutions they needed to calculate to get a torpedo to hit anything if fired by a submarine?  Its not like exactly like a surface launched torpedo or an air dropped torpedo.

Torpedo armed ships had the same TDC's for their torpedoes and that is represented by the torpedo lead indicator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,933
[RLGN]
Members
16,240 posts
28,133 battles
52 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

He was talking about the pinging which does turn them into homing torpedoes.

Yes?

My answer is that using an new mechanic like pinging (at least against surface targets,) is completely unnecessary.

Underwater targets? If WG can’t figure out a way for the guide to work underwater, then maybe the don’t need to be adding subs.

Anything involving using the ‘ping’ system to guide torpedoes, is just asking for the same kind of skill gap abuses that occurred and are occurring with carriers. A tiny fraction of players who can use overly complicated mechanics, and the vast majority who can barely get by at best.

I saw that repeatedly in the last sub test. Most sub drivers fumbling around, and a very few standing out to a significant degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,209
[TDRB]
Members
5,329 posts
13,743 battles
1 hour ago, VonSchoenvorts said:

Okay I will admit that I was not thrilled about submarines being added to the game because I already have enough torpedoes to dodge out of nowhere as it is with the DD's. As subs are now I hope they are never in random battles. There are four things that if they would change I might not mind them in the game. First, the homing torps are just stupid for era of ships they are representing and it's already difficult enough to dodge all the torps without them following me. Second, subs back then could NOT see ships beneath periscope depth, yes the could hear them but not see them so I think they should only be able to shoot torps at periscope depth or on the surface. Third CV's should be equipped with anti submarine squadrons. Lastly, subs should have a deck gun and a anti aircraft gun. Well that's my two cents on the subject.

I feel deck guns & AA would increase balancing issues. I believe homing torpedoes is to be a balancing mechanic but, IMO, it not ready for normal battle modes. Subs shot torpedoes at each other under water so why can't they shoot at surface ships? Of course it is more difficult to hit the target with the sonar of that era than the old war movies make it out to be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×