Submarine changes are over the top

[DevilD0g]

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all.  its only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!  Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. The last test most of the Battleships were AI so they needed protection, but human players would act differently. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

For submarines to get the same level of damage as before with hitting the bow and stern of a ship, Now they have to hit exactly the same spot , twice and a marker shows up on the ship where its going to hit !!  Really ?  How many of you can fire your guns at a ship and hit exactly the same spot twice in a space of 15=20 seconds with the movement and turning of the ship, not often.  Sure  you will get a hit with torpedoes but that level of citadels as was in the past still difficult to do, will be even more difficult, not imposssible but much more reduced.

If  your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher and of course they will support it. 

Wargamming should be fixing the fact that destroyers cant detect you on their deepest depth.  Think harder Wargamming.

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

...using the pings is a noob trap.

The meta last time was NOT to use them...and to YOLO porpoise surface rush ships...

[cheapinkc]

There was much complaining about a lack of counter play in earlier tests.  I see more options for counter play against subs this time around.  Doesn’t mean all of these are going to make it to the final version in this or any other form.

 

[DevilD0g]

well there was the yolo porpoise rushing ships as trying to get a ping on bow and stern is hard ,  but yolo porpoising battleships is still an option  but with increased detection range and battleships calling in AI planes to drop depth charges it will be significantly reduced.

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

Just now, cheapinkc said:

There was much complaining about a lack of counter play in earlier tests.  I see more options for counter play against subs this time around.  Doesn’t mean all of these are going to make it to the final version in this or any other form.

 

Yes, this has been the good part about how WG is testing subs...

...they are taking the time to see what works...and what gets exploited.

Way better than the CV rework in that respect.

[DevilD0g]

8 minutes ago, cheapinkc said:

There was much complaining about a lack of counter play in earlier tests.  I see more options for counter play against subs this time around.  Doesn’t mean all of these are going to make it to the final version in this or any other form.

 

if you got detected by a Destroyer it was pretty much game over as they could detect  you at your deepest depth. Destroyers just had to team play more to get subs killed, but in the testing a lot of the battleships were AI ships so they would never have behaved like real players.  I dont see the need to call in AI bombers with depth charges when you have carriers, that gives them another job to do or Destroyers another job to to do instead of racing around the edge of the battle, not contributing, so they can go and get their glory carrier kill.

 

[BrushWolf]

17 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all.  its only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!  Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

For submarines to get the same level of damage as before with hitting the bow and stern of a ship, Now they have to hit exactly the same spot , twice and a marker shows up on the ship where its going to hit !!  Really ?  How many of you can fire your guns at a ship and hit exactly the same spot twice in a space of 15=20 seconds with the movement and turning of the ship, not often.  Sure  you will get a hit with torpedoes but that level of citadels as was in the past still difficult to do, will be even more difficult, not imposssible but much more reduced.

If  your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher and of course they will support it.   Think harder Wargamming.

 

The BB & CA depth charge planes while they make an automated attack have to have the attack area set by the BB/CA player.

12 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

...using the pings is a noob trap.

The meta last time was NOT to use them...and to YOLO porpoise surface rush ships...

Porpoise is functionally dead, no more up, fire, and dive before a shot could be fired

3 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

if you got detected by a Destroyer it was pretty much game over.  They just had to team play more, but in the testing a lot of the battleships were AI ships so they would never have behaved like real players.  I dont see the need to call in AI bombers with depth charges when you have carriers, that gives them another job to do or Destroyers another job to to do.

 

DD's owning subs that they get close to is unchanged. I would like to see a Silent Running consumable that would allow a sub to get clear of a single attacking DD/CL. If multiple enemies are getting the direction to go ping then the consumable would not work and good luck to them.

[bankaibahamut]

As long as sub torps can still bypass torpedo protection, I don't care at all about any complaints sub drivers have.

[Your_SAT_Score]

26 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all.  its only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!  Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

If  your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher.

 

Vigilance is not a common skill to take even for BBs. Keep in mind that subs only need to ping you once for homing to take effect. You can see it coming, but that doesn't aways mean you can evade the homing torps. 
DDs in smoke is practically a dead giveaway in its own right. Not to mention DDs generally torp from much further away. 

A very common complaint from the last test was that CAs and BBs had practically no counterplay against subs, thus the introduction of depth charge planes to give them some sort of counterplay. 

Always remember this is still a work in progress and subject to change. Not all of the mechanics that will be tested will necessarily make it to live. 

Finally, I recommend you actually test the subs. Theorycrafting does not always tell you how the ship may actually perform in game. This is why WG is testing the subs and not throwing them into live. Don't want a repeat of the CV rework. 

[DevilD0g]

2 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The BB & CA depth charge planes while they make an automated attack have to have the attack area set by the BB/CA player.

Porpoise is functionally dead, no more up, fire, and dive before a shot could be fired

DD's owning subs that they get close to is unchanged. I would like to see a Silent Running consumable that would allow a sub to get clear of a single attacking DD/CL. If multiple enemies are getting the direction to go ping then the consumable would not work and good luck to them.

A silent running consumable is a good idea, but i would still prefer them not to be able to detect  you at your deepest depth as why bother putting it  in.  i think that porpoise fire is still able to be done but more difficult and yes i agree with  you that destroyers will always own subs, the detection range before was large now in the new trial,  its even larger.  But the torpedo attack marker on ships is to blatant and should be removed.  its to direct , to concise and to accurate and allows for easy evasion.

[BrushWolf]

10 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

A silent running consumable is a good idea, but i would still prefer them not to be able to detect  you at your deepest depth as why bother putting it  in.  i think that porpoise fire is still able to be done but more difficult and yes i agree with  you that destroyers will always own subs, the detection range before was large now in the new trial,  its even larger.  But the torpedo attack marker on ships is to blatant and should be removed.  its to direct , to concise and to accurate and allows for easy evasion.

It will still work but they will take damage now which is a huge improvement on what we had before.

[Akeno017]

42 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!

Um..

A giant smoke screen is a very obvious "this is my position im attacking from".

 

 

44 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher

This is categorically wrong in every possible manner, excluding 1 particular form involving 3 goats and a trombone.

These ships have non-existent health pools, and every slot filled by an SS will be a net-loss in potential damage simply because the DD/CA/BB it took the slot of, had more hp.

[ArIskandir]

47 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all. 

How would you know? Test haven't started yet....

48 minutes ago, DevilD0g said:

 much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died.

I guess you didn't played much and weren't good at playing subs.

By the test end, I was a bit "scared" about charging a sub, mano-a-mano. Some guys had gotten good enough to easily torp you on your approach if you were careless or nail you at point blank after doing a "magic 6" on your depth charges... heck even the less capable knew enough to ram you when "cornered". 

 

[ArIskandir]

35 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Porpoise is functionally dead, no more up, fire, and dive before a shot could be fired

You are quite optimistic, a buffer zone of 4 mts won't be enough unless dive times get severely increased. Which we won't know until test goes live.

38 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

I would like to see a Silent Running consumable

I would settle for making the Hydrophone detection dependent to noise level of the sub. If you don't move and don't ping (remain silent) you shouldn't be detected unless they use Hydro (sonar) consumable.

[BrushWolf]

4 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I would settle for making the Hydrophone detection dependent to noise level of the sub. If you don't move and don't ping (remain silent) you shouldn't be detected unless they use Hydro (sonar) consumable.

The idea of the silent running consumable is to allow the sub to disengage from a single DD. However, your idea is good too.

[AXELGREASE]

1 hour ago, DevilD0g said:

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all.  its only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!  Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. The last test most of the Battleships were AI so they needed protection, but human players would act differently. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

For submarines to get the same level of damage as before with hitting the bow and stern of a ship, Now they have to hit exactly the same spot , twice and a marker shows up on the ship where its going to hit !!  Really ?  How many of you can fire your guns at a ship and hit exactly the same spot twice in a space of 15=20 seconds with the movement and turning of the ship, not often.  Sure  you will get a hit with torpedoes but that level of citadels as was in the past still difficult to do, will be even more difficult, not imposssible but much more reduced.

If  your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher and of course they will support it. 

Wargamming should be fixing the fact that destroyers cant detect you on their deepest depth.  Think harder Wargamming.

 

Seriously, subs were a bit OP.  Yes the skill ceiling was too highbut with the one ping home, that has lowered thr skill a huge amount.  Oh, and BBs/Heavy cruisers needed some way to attack the sub. 

On the other side of the coin is that fact WG did NOTHING to stop subs from staying submerged the whole game.   You can't have it both ways a free reign to stay submerged and cause unlimited damage with easier pings (only one required for homing) AND no counter from BBs and CAs. 

[Somtaaw]

32 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I would settle for making the Hydrophone detection dependent to noise level of the sub. If you don't move and don't ping (remain silent) you shouldn't be detected unless they use Hydro (sonar) consumable.

 

The only major response to this is whether it should be fitting to historical basis:

• American subs were/are ridiculously quiet even while moving but they aren't noted for being very fast overall.
• Russian subs, particularly Alfa's were ridiculously noisy but were actually so fast they could outrun (and outdive) the torpedoes fired at them, due to hulls built out of titanium.
• German subs were somewhere between these two extremes, they were pretty fast (but rather noisy) at snorkel depths because they could keep their diesels running, otherwise they were pretty damned quiet subs when using battery power.

[LastRemnant]

1 hour ago, DevilD0g said:

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all.  its only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!!  Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. The last test most of the Battleships were AI so they needed protection, but human players would act differently. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

For submarines to get the same level of damage as before with hitting the bow and stern of a ship, Now they have to hit exactly the same spot , twice and a marker shows up on the ship where its going to hit !!  Really ?  How many of you can fire your guns at a ship and hit exactly the same spot twice in a space of 15=20 seconds with the movement and turning of the ship, not often.  Sure  you will get a hit with torpedoes but that level of citadels as was in the past still difficult to do, will be even more difficult, not imposssible but much more reduced.

If  your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher and of course they will support it. 

Wargamming should be fixing the fact that destroyers cant detect you on their deepest depth.  Think harder Wargamming.

 

So I have a question did you assume all of this from the video or did you actually go into the test server try it out  

[PrinzEugen85]

I think the changes are pretty good and reasonable. Pinging twice sucked and getting a full charge on the bottom didn't make any sense. If it's the end of the match, and only a battleship or cruiser remain, they need a viable ASW and the planes were a good idea for that. Clearly, a good sub commander is going to have to avoid DDs to get the juicy stuff as a matter of principle.

[Laser_Beam]

2 hours ago, DevilD0g said:

1. Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them to the point of why introduce them at all. 

 

2. It's only made playing submarines worse and much harder as before when a destroyer found you in a sub it was only a matter of time before you died. Who thought up the idea of when a ship is pinged, it shows on the ship which side the torpedoes are coming from. you might as well get a megaphone to the player and say im going to attack you here !!!. They already have captain skill vigilance, that should be enough, thats a level playing field.  That mechanic is not done for destroyers in smoke when they fire torpedoes  so why should it have to be enacted for submarines !!! 

 

Then you  have Battleships calling in  AI depth charge drops on top of the destroyer depth charge drops, I think someone had a brain fart watching the greyhound movie. The last test most of the Battleships were AI so they needed protection, but human players would act differently. Its totally over the top as there are already carrier planes that can drop bombs on them and that is not a level playing field.  Then you have increasing the detection range of submarines if it wasnt already to large.  Before, once a destroyer started attacking  you, you were pretty much dead  straight away.   If your going to have Battleships call in AI aircraft, why cant submarines release mines to ships that are chasing them ???

For submarines to get the same level of damage as before with hitting the bow and stern of a ship, Now they have to hit exactly the same spot , twice and a marker shows up on the ship where its going to hit !!  Really ?  How many of you can fire your guns at a ship and hit exactly the same spot twice in a space of 15=20 seconds with the movement and turning of the ship, not often.  Sure  you will get a hit with torpedoes but that level of citadels as was in the past still difficult to do, will be even more difficult, not imposssible but much more reduced.

 

3. If your going to close down the game play and make it near impossible for submarines to survive then why bother introducing them.  But then the new "toys" for the highest damage dealing ships in the game to kill more,  the alpha battleships will be welcomed to increase their damage levels even higher and of course they will support it. 

 

4. Wargamming should be fixing the fact that destroyers cant detect you on their deepest depth.  Think harder Wargamming.

 

1.  Why is WG introducing them?  Excellent rhetorical question.  WG won't answer this question as it will be too hard for the PR department (and if it is answered google translate would be required)

2. DD's in smoke can be hydro'd/radar'd and hit with blind fire (and the smoke is a giveaway as to which side the torps will be on).   Subs below 5m are almost invincible (or has that changed?)  Maybe the idea is to make them worse, IMHO they add nothing to the game.  I'm not saying you're wrong, but your comparison needs some work

3. I thought subs below 5m were almost invincible?   

4. WG needs to fix ALOT before adding anything else.  Maybe finish a few more tech trees (CW)?  Add some more operations?  

[MannyD_of_The_Sea]

2 hours ago, DevilD0g said:

Think harder Wargamming.

Ask yourself if you really want this. After all, it is WG. Their thinking harder might not result in their thinking better.

[kgh52]

Quote

Submarine changes are over the top and make it far to easy to kill them

If CV's are any indication WG will not be able to balance subs either. 

 

[FrodoFraggin]

Wait, last time we could use the standard client and use our own ships, captains, etc, some of which could work off containers, dailies and such but this time we would have to use the test client again?  Big mistake there.

[AJTP89]

26 minutes ago, FrodoFraggin said:

Wait, last time we could use the standard client and use our own ships, captains, etc, some of which could work off containers, dailies and such but this time we would have to use the test client again?  Big mistake there.

Subs are in Randoms for this round, you want to try that on the live server?

The TST server is much easier for WG to mess with than the live server, if something breaks it's not going to take down the entire prod server. And they can update things a lot easier without worrying about downtime. So TST is just a better place to run these kinds of tests.

[FrodoFraggin]

40 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

Subs are in Randoms for this round, you want to try that on the live server?

The TST server is much easier for WG to mess with than the live server, if something breaks it's not going to take down the entire prod server. And they can update things a lot easier without worrying about downtime. So TST is just a better place to run these kinds of tests.

Not sure I understand, the previous test iteration was effectively Randoms, albeit T6 only.  Low numbers meant bots were used, but I understand PST uses bots as well?