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

Subs..... Worse than before?

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,846
[SGSS]
Members
6,915 posts

First 2 games in months.

Sub killed me both times and I could do nothing. Magic torps, magic speed and could not even shoot back.

What is the point of playing?

Edited by jags_domain
  • Cool 7
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,364
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,928 posts
8,973 battles
8 hours ago, jags_domain said:

First 2 games in months.

Sub killed me both times and I could do nothing. Magic torps, magic speed and could not even shoot back.

What is the point of playing?

Can you post the replay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,435 posts

I just posted this in another thread.   This is my take on the Sub issues.  I hear you and have felt the same frustration.  Try hitting the R key... your Damage control key,  after the ping.  It appears to work to break the torps tracking.  I keep reading up on this but not completely sure how this works. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you do not like it stop sending money to WOWS.   Just play the game for free.  WOWs gets a ton of feedback by their income stream.  If a large enough percentage stop paying after an update they know.   

I avoid Tiers 6 and 7 due to the last two updates. 

 

 I am royally pissed off about Sub play in Tier 6.  The subs can launch acoustic guided torps at WWI never modified ships outside of the anti- submarine aircraft provided!    The sub can still submerge if it gets hit by a ship launched torpedo.   That torpedo should put a hole bigger than the submarine itself into the submarine.  Yet it can still submerge!  

However...

This is a Tier 6 issue.   To my surprise tier 9 and 10 are playing rather well with the exception of some DD's such as my Forrest Sherman spitting out a TON of shells waaaay across the map.  Extremely OP if these DDs survive the first part of the game. 

My answer is to play Tier 9 and 10.    Six and seven have become home to some weird stuff. Double CV games and Subs.   Tier 6 is a crapshoot for the surface fleet. 

I rarely play CV's but I am very impressed with the fair play at Tiers 9 and 10.  I am having ALOT OF FUN at Tiers 9, 10 and +. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,700
[VIGIL]
Members
1,441 posts
38 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Na I just dont care enough anymore lol

That’s smart, because people on this forum love to tear into folks that dislike subs, telling them how they should have played against the sub, or stat-shaming them by saying you need to have X games in subs to understand them.

 

The beatings will continue until morale about subs improves. 

Edited by Dudefella
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
226
[HI-CS]
Members
194 posts

Subs need to be nerfed. hypersonic speeds, especially while submerged, combined with homing torps and the annoying ping, ping, ping! They wreck every game they're in. Not historic even for the 50's or 60's, much less the era that the majority of the game represents. Every warship after WWI had sonar or ASDIC. Most had some sort of countermeasures. At least depth charges. The airstrike is useless. Too limited in scope and short-ranged. Subs were never intended to fight in fleet engagements. They were silent hunters, not area-denial weapons.

Edited by scott_3721
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52
[WOLFD]
Members
130 posts
7,719 battles

As scott_3721 observed at the end of his post above, submarines of the time period covered by the game were not fleet killers. By and large they were submersible raiders targeting the enemies commerce. They were extremely effective at destroying a nation's ability to wage war by sweeping their cargo ships and tankers from the sea lanes or creating enough chaos that those ships stayed in port. Submarines were effective scouts for naval task forces, but due to their slow speed both on the surface and submerged they had to be positioned well ahead of time. Acoustic homing torpedoes were not really a thing during the time period either. Yes, the Germans developed one and used it against merchant convoys for a time. Once the Allies discovered this they quickly came up with effective counter measures such as towable noisemakers that generated more noise than the target ship. In response, the German submarine fleet returned to the practice of primarily using "dumb" torpedoes. The acoustic torpedoes developed by the U.S. Navy did not come on the scene until very near the end of the war in the Pacific Theater. They had a very short range and were notoriously unreliable. Attempting to shoehorn submarines into the game has caused a very real balance issue that reminds  me a lot of RTS CV's. They are either incredibly effective/OP or completely useless and filling a slot on the team that would have been more effectively held by a different ship type. Maybe there is a middle ground where they can be successfully integrated into the game, but the current iteration is not it. 

Edited by CaptEvul
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22
[HMCSH]
Beta Testers
137 posts
9,857 battles

The largest problem with subs are their ability to NARC....errr ping ships which then permits the homing torpedoes. Worse yet, a ship has to repair itself to remove the NARC. But during the cool down period can be NARCed again.

I get it that the subs have literally 5 to 6 times their historical submerged speed so they can get into position - as is the nature of the game (after all we have torpedoes in this game that can go in excess of 60 to 70 knots). That super high submerged speed is also an issue.

 

Personally, I dislike subs. But if subs are to stay; remove the homing torpedoes. Instead give them two torpedo options: 1) fast and short ranged. 2) moderate speed and long range. Replace the subs' high submerged speed (except for those historical classes which possessed such speed) with a short duration Engine Boost consumable akin to Italian Destroyers - which can be used for quick closing or escaping.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,654
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
5,169 posts
15,914 battles
11 hours ago, CaptEvul said:

As scott_3721 observed at the end of his post above, submarines of the time period covered by the game were not fleet killers. By and large they were submersible raiders targeting the enemies commerce. They were extremely effective at destroying a nation's ability to wage war by sweeping their cargo ships and tankers from the sea lanes or creating enough chaos that those ships stayed in port. Submarines were effective scouts for naval task forces, but due to their slow speed both on the surface and submerged they had to be positioned well ahead of time. Acoustic homing torpedoes were not really a thing during the time period either. Yes, the Germans developed one and used it against merchant convoys for a time. Once the Allies discovered this they quickly came up with effective counter measures such as towable noisemakers that generated more noise than the target ship. In response, the German submarine fleet returned to the practice of primarily using "dumb" torpedoes. The acoustic torpedoes developed by the U.S. Navy did not come on the scene until very near the end of the war in the Pacific Theater. They had a very short range and were notoriously unreliable. Attempting to shoehorn submarines into the game has caused a very real balance issue that reminds  me a lot of RTS CV's. They are either incredibly effective/OP or completely useless and filling a slot on the team that would have been more effectively held by a different ship type. Maybe there is a middle ground where they can be successfully integrated into the game, but the current iteration is not it. 

This entire post is a conglomeration of hyperbolic contradictions. Capital ships, in fleets, of fleets Like HMS Barham Ark Royal, submarines have a distinct WW2 and post war history of sinking capital ships: aka, fleet killers.

Meanwhile your huge contradictory perseption is emitted in your rant inferring DDs did otherwise. I regret to inform you, no DD in naval history has ever sunk an enemy aircraft Carrier or Battleship. Meanwhile, the deflected ego's of players like your self had WG shoe horn them like a square block into a round hole.

Just like CVs, this is a 20th century naval game. Your mind is obviously either with Jack Sparrow or Jack Aubrey; the 19th century may be closer to the 18th century but still: wrong game.

Your argument against super cavitation (appropriate scientific connotations) torpedoes but it's quite obvious hippocrates like the OP, have no problem with ~90kt torpedoes coming off of Pan-European DDs, or Japanese destroyers. What's even more damaging to your credibility, is that unlike submarines, those Holland's, and Shimakazes literally do that to entire fleets in game, while traveling at ~40kts and from less than 6km away. Bolao can't reach 30kts in speed submerged without modifiers: yet.

So no, Submarines are the quark that belongs in that leaking hole DDs have failed to stop. Meanwhile, DDs still fulfill the roll they've always fulfilled albeit with less impunity than a few patches ago. 

That means Destroyers have to assume their more historical role of fleet screening and area denial. Is that so hard?

Edited by Crokodone
  • Thanks 2
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[ICO]
Members
36 posts
9,583 battles
On 4/23/2022 at 2:57 PM, jags_domain said:

First 2 games in months.

Sub killed me both times and I could do nothing. Magic torps, magic speed and could not even shoot back.

What is the point of playing?

No kidding.  Get this, was playing an Iowa, fast BB, had a Balao get about 1 mile on my tail and was keeping up with me, and he stayed right there so my ASW planes cannot strike within somewhere around 1 mile of the ship.  The sub was totally immune to any attack, didn't even bother to submerge sometimes.  Just popped off 6 torp salvos until I was dead.  Utterly stupid.

Here's the thing I don't get about the game design.  I am FINE with subs and CVs being in the game.  Both types of weapons were in the WWII era.  There is NO reason, no game balance reason to make subs so fast underwater. None.

In case it's lost on the game designers, Tactical battle engagements are nothing but an application of game theory.  Simple as that.  There is no reason to relatively, important point there, relatively take any of these weapon systems out of scope of their relative real world abilities.  I'm not talking about radar ranges, timing of radar, reloads or other adjustments, I'm talking about the armor, guns, mobility aspects of the platform.  Subs had very low surface detection ranges and surface speeds in the 20-25 knot range.  Beneath the surface they were much slower but had stealth.  A tradeoff. There is no game balance reason for having homing torpedoes and 28knot submerged speed and total immunity from surface air strikes from the targeted ship WHILE ON THE SURFACE.

A submarine application in this game shouldn't be much different than a DD with smoke.  A DD has low surface detection and a defense ability to smoke and escape with radar/sonar countering the smoke.  A sub will have much lower surface detection, a defense maneuver with submerging and that defense maneuver should be countered by sonar.  

As they are, to balance them out, you need cruisers and DDs with homing torps, helicopters dropping sonar buoys all over the place to counter a Tier X sub.  Maybe even add a P3 Orion with a magnetic anomaly detector and some more homing torps.

I'm not sure right off how many battles I've had in WoWs, but that incident with the Balao was probably the most ridiculous thing I have seen ever.  It was like playing an FPS where someone has an aimbot, god mode on and can see and shoot though walls.  Utter nonsense.

Edited by _Rocinante_
typo
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
204
[NWO-1]
Volunteer Moderator
440 posts
7,585 battles
4 minutes ago, _Rocinante_ said:

No kidding.  Get this, was playing an Iowa, fast BB, had a Balao get about 1 mile on my tail and was keeping up with me, and he stayed right there so my ASW planes cannot strike within somewhere around 1 mile of the ship.  The sub was totally immune to any attack, didn't even bother to submerge.  Just popped off 6 torp salvos until I was dead.  Utterly stupid.

Here's the thing I don't get about the game design.  I am FINE with subs and CVs being in the game.  Both types of weapons where in the WWII era.  There is NO reason, no game balance reason to make subs so fast underwater. None.

In case it's lost on the game designers, Tactical battle engagements are nothing but an application of game theory.  Simple as that.  There is no reason to relatively, important point there, relatively take any of these weapon systems out of scope of their relative real world abilities.  I'm not talking about radar ranges, timing of radar, reloads or other adjustments, I'm talking about the armor, guns, mobility aspects of the platform.  Subs had very low surface detection ranges and surface speeds in the 20-25 knot range.  Beneath the surface they were much slower but had stealth.  A tradeoff. There is no game balance reason for having homing torpedoes and 28knot submerged speed and total immunity from surface air strikes from the targeted ship WHILE ON THE SURFACE.

A submarine application in this game shouldn't be much different than a DD with smoke.  A DD has low surface detection and a defense ability to smoke and escape with radar/sonar countering the smoke.  A sub will have much lower surface detection, a defense maneuver with submerging and that defense maneuver should be countered by sonar.  

As they are, to balance them out, you need cruisers and DDs with homing torps, helicopters dropping sonar buoys all over the place to counter a Tier X sub.  Maybe even add a P3 Orion with a magnetic anomaly detector and some more homing torps.

I'm not sure right off how many battles I've had in WoWs, but that incident with the Balao was probably the most ridiculous thing I have seen ever.  It was like playing an FPS where someone has an aimbot, god mode on and can see and shoot though walls.  Utter nonsense.

A sub that close is vulnerable to main and secondary guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[ICO]
Members
36 posts
9,583 battles
Just now, MollyGodiva said:

A sub that close is vulnerable to main and secondary guns.

No, it wasn't.  I actually have a secondary build on the Iowa.  He was so close, he was below the firing angle of the rear main turret and apparently the secondary guns can't hit there.  I tried shaking this guy trying to get a secondary battery to lock and he would just stay in that zone right off my tail.  I'm not sure what the torp arming range is for a Balao subs, if any, but this went on for a while.  He hit me with 15 torps to finally sink me and I had ZERO hits on him.

Apparently someone said in the game, some of the more well known twitch streamers made some videos about how some of these tactics make the subs invulnerable.  Just poor game design.  For the life of me I can't see how this gets implemented.  This isn't like WG first attempt at this.  Seems like they could have just made this similar as DDs, but with lower detection and submersible capability in place of the smoke.  No need for this nonsense.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
863
[SOUS]
Members
771 posts
6,664 battles

It's really simple, wargaming thinks they are making the right choices with subs, but the whole idea of subs are a disaster and it's been 3 1/2 years, they can't balance them and when they do, they unbalance other ships and than they go back and make subs stronger and it's rinse and repeat, it's a huge waste of resources and time.

also, they said in a dev blog a few months ago that subs are vulernable, so they nerfed depth charge planes and gave a small damage buff to depth charge planes and they are still weak and can't damage a sub, they made subs harder to kill which is again, another attempt they failed, they are so unbalanced, it's cringe.

Edited by Itsj_p
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[ICO]
Members
36 posts
9,583 battles
36 minutes ago, Itsj_p said:

It's really simple, wargaming thinks they are making the right choices with subs, but the whole idea of subs are a disaster and it's been 3 1/2 years, they can't balance them and when they do, they unbalance other ships and than they go back and make subs stronger and it's rinse and repeat, it's a huge waste of resources and time.

also, they said in a dev blog a few months ago that subs are vulnerable, so they nerfed depth charge planes and gave a small damage buff to depth charge planes and they are still weak and can't damage a sub, they made subs harder to kill which is again, another attempt they failed, they are so unbalanced, it's cringe.

 

Subs should be vulnerable.  That is exactly like they were in WWII.  But, they were also effective because they had stealth and a hard to defeat at the time, defensive capability, submergibility. This is an attribute that should be modeled in the game.  They had enough surface speed in the game to get near and in caps like a slow BB would and depending on what role the subs are intended to have, they could have adjusted their spawn points since they are slower than most surface ships.

Subs worked in a real world tactical environment with these vulnerabilities due to the skill of the command and the advantages that subs had in terms of stealth.  But they were unforgiving if they made a mistake.  You can't take a broadside from cruiser, write off the damage as an over pen which is "plausible" with a surface ship, and just submerge with over pen damage in your pressure vessel and be on your merry way.

And I really want subs to work, but this isn't it.  I hate to be complaining and not at least provide some thoughts on what might work.  Maybe they tried it and it didn't work.  But within their line of "thinking" with the game mechanics, there are a couple of things they could do without rewriting the entire game I would think.

1.  A sub fires it targeting sonar off, they should be visible on the map for 30 seconds of so of each ping, just like a BB firing guns in smoke.  That little visual sonar ripple was an improvement...but no.

2. Your speed should be cut by 50%-75% underwater.  Give them greater submersible time if needed.

3. Get rid of the homing torperdoes and lower their surface detection.  A Balao is detectible at ranges greater than some DDs.  I've lived on the ocean front before in a multi-story building.  A WWII sub on the surface would be damn near impossible to visually detect at 6KM unless you were looking right at it through binoculars and even then with sun glint and wave action...no.

4.  Do something about the subs that lock in on the rear of ship and sit inside the minimum attack range of the ASW aircraft.  Wouldn't be a problem if a sub didn't have the same speed nearly as a WWII fast battleship.

And again, subs should be vulnerable.  How many times has any of us in a light cruiser been one shot deleted if we made a stupid mistake.  Cruisers probably require the most skill to play in the game but a good cruiser player can cause havoc.  A subs vulnerability comes with the benefit of stealth.  It should require skill to work with that trade off.

Edited by _Rocinante_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[RUSHR]
Members
2 posts
29,515 battles

why r u killing this game?? i dont want to play this game anymore because of subs...

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
586
[TOG]
Members
432 posts
13,483 battles
11 minutes ago, KIT79 said:

why r u killing this game?? i dont want to play this game anymore because of subs...

Yup. Me too. WG used to enjoy me spending any where from $50 to $100 per week. I bought almost every new premium and participated in most events. I blew through doubloons and bought flags all the time. 

I logged in daily ( when home and not traveling ) and played for hours.

When subs came along I saw them for the garbage element they were. Instead of spending resources on things like new maps, scenarios, and other game enhancements, they spent all their resources on creating an underwater aquarium environment to help sell the stupid things. haven't spent a dime in two months, maybe logged on a couple times.

The only thing keeping the game on my system is my clan and clan battles, but I'm sure they will wreck them next.

I refuse to play when you can have a match with a super CV, two subs and a bunch of DD's, all keeping you spotted and with HE spam raining hell fire down from the super cruisers.

Pings flying left and right, no counter to them while having to use damage control to stop the homing. Effing stupid.

On the verge of uninstalling.

GG Wargaming.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
81 posts
32,256 battles
20 hours ago, MollyGodiva said:

A sub that close is vulnerable to main and secondary guns.

Ok well lets try this, A sub at 10k depth, red able to take fire from main guns, and broadside to an akizuki, I landed 26 shells for a whopping 5100 damage? How is that normal? I averaged 198 points of damage per shell, the sub literally took far more damage from 12 secondary shells on an amagi then I gave him, that cant be right, but that what the numbers showed. Incidentally this sub was 3k away and closing, he had no fear, 

 

Edited by Robert_Birdiebutt_Johnso
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×