Submarines will either be Overpowered or Underpowered, there is no in between

[Mr_Alex]

Submarines being added as i see is a very bad idea for WOWS, the reason is that I have a hard time believing that they will be easily balanced, there will be players demanding that submarines be allowed to have the ability to chase down BB's and that torpedoes do a outrageous amount of damage, that in itself is OP (overpowered), there is no in between, Subs will either have to be Underpowered or Overpowered, there is no in between and if you thought CV was causing grief on the forums, just wait till submarines come to this game if Wargaming is making them.

[TabbyHopkins]

Stick, meet this dead horse.

 

 

As if yet another topic was needed.

[AGMx]

deleted

[Carrier_Taiyo]

[TabbyHopkins]

 

Why thank you for finding that picture. *borrows*

[Carrier_Taiyo]

 

Why thank you for finding that picture. *borrows*

 

sure, go ahead!

[madgiecool]

Link please.

[userz123]

Ppl need to realise subs are not used in fleet warfare, they have no place in surface naval battle, they are used before and after a naval battle not during a naval battle. But WG will not miss out chance on making money from stupid submarine fanboy(especially German fanboy). I am betting that WG will add sub regardless.

[BrokenDoll]

* sighs * And so it begins again....  

 

[ligerox]

Submarines being added as i see is a very bad idea for WOWS, the reason is that I have a hard time believing that they will be easily balanced, there will be players demanding that submarines be allowed to have the ability to chase down BB's and that torpedoes do a outrageous amount of damage, that in itself is OP (overpowered), there is no in between, Subs will either have to be Underpowered or Overpowered, there is no in between and if you thought CV was causing grief on the forums, just wait till submarines come to this game if Wargaming is making them.

[Coopz]

Although I am only contributing to this but why are people bumping these dumb threads just to post lame memes?

[TabbyHopkins]

Although I am only contributing to this but why are people bumping these dumb threads just to post lame memes?

 

Because we've seen this thread so many times, it went from annoying, to funny, to borring, to annoyingly funny that it is up yet again. And to see who has the best meme.

[WanderingGhost]

Well, odds are that, if they really are still considering it -

 

They won't be able to submerge, and will likely have camo similar to a DD

Will be wholly reliant on torpedo's because they will have at best one deck gun to my knowledge

And lack AA.

 

So if you look at it from a logic stand point, given that most things have talked that subs will not submerge, your really talking about a variation on DD game play. It'll likely be stealthy and had longer range torps with some tweaks to speed and whatever else to compensate the fact that it only has forward firing tubes to my knowledge. Maybe it'll have decent-ish speed and mobility.

 

Drawbacks would be the fact that it only fires forward and has maybe one secondary weapon over torpedo's, with little or know air defense meaning carriers could wreck it, a scout/bomber could wreck it, being forced to stay surfaced means it can easily be hit by ships. The class can be balanced if introduced, like all the others, it's gonna take work. Not like everything were at started perfect and some of it still isn't.

[TabbyHopkins]

Well, odds are that, if they really are still considering it -

 

They won't be able to submerge, and will likely have camo similar to a DD

Will be wholly reliant on torpedo's because they will have at best one deck gun to my knowledge

And lack AA.

 

So if you look at it from a logic stand point, given that most things have talked that subs will not submerge, your really talking about a variation on DD game play. It'll likely be stealthy and had longer range torps with some tweaks to speed and whatever else to compensate the fact that it only has forward firing tubes to my knowledge. Maybe it'll have decent-ish speed and mobility.

 

Drawbacks would be the fact that it only fires forward and has maybe one secondary weapon over torpedo's, with little or know air defense meaning carriers could wreck it, a scout/bomber could wreck it, being forced to stay surfaced means it can easily be hit by ships. The class can be balanced if introduced, like all the others, it's gonna take work. Not like everything were at started perfect and some of it still isn't.

 

A submarine (sub...marine. Under....water) that cannot submerge? May as well sail an Elco torpedo boat. Atleast then you would have the speed to justify the lack (read: None) of any armor.

 

And not that it makes any differance, but there were some submarines with beefy deck guns, IIRC, a British class with, like, a 6 inch gun. Then, too, some submarines had two deck guns, USS Narwhale being an example. And the Type XXI had a two twin...I think it was 20mm autocannons, fore and aft of the conn. And many, many submarines had torpedo tubes fore and aft as well.

[Hereticus2142]

Well, odds are that, if they really are still considering it -

 

They won't be able to submerge, and will likely have camo similar to a DD

Will be wholly reliant on torpedo's because they will have at best one deck gun to my knowledge

And lack AA.

 

So if you look at it from a logic stand point, given that most things have talked that subs will not submerge, your really talking about a variation on DD game play. It'll likely be stealthy and had longer range torps with some tweaks to speed and whatever else to compensate the fact that it only has forward firing tubes to my knowledge. Maybe it'll have decent-ish speed and mobility.

 

Drawbacks would be the fact that it only fires forward and has maybe one secondary weapon over torpedo's, with little or know air defense meaning carriers could wreck it, a scout/bomber could wreck it, being forced to stay surfaced means it can easily be hit by ships. The class can be balanced if introduced, like all the others, it's gonna take work. Not like everything were at started perfect and some of it still isn't.

 

Odds are that its being deliberated by WG are pretty good, as you say.  The rest of your post is all false and subject to purely speculation as Wargaming has literally said nothing on those particular details.  Only that Submarines are on the table...

 

From what little has been said by the devs between the Famitsu interview last month with WoWS Head Director Ivan Morooz, Devs at Gamescom this month, and a recent reaffirmation by a WG employee on Reddit.... 

 

Wargaming want' to do a Class-Realignment system which would expand the current 4 class system to something like 8 or 9 classes.   This would presumably expand the Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanic to account for Submarines both acting as a counter to a class and inturn having a class counter  them.

 

Wargaming also has it in mind to introduce a weather system with rolling waves, day/night cycle, even fog mechanics which would require some fine-tuning work on  the game engine... If there doing such then its not a stretch to suggest they will also optimize the map/ocean depth to be workable for Submarines.

 

But again, EVERYTHING is subjective, nothing is absolute one way or another.

[Noth]

 

Odds are that its being deliberated by WG are pretty good, as you say.  The rest of your post is all false and subject to purely speculation as Wargaming has literally said nothing on those particular details.  Only that Submarines are on the table...

 

From what little has been said by the devs between the Famitsu interview last month with WoWS Head Director Ivan Morooz, Devs at Gamescom this month, and a recent reaffirmation by a WG employee on Reddit.... 

 

Wargaming want' to do a Class-Realignment system which would expand the current 4 class system to something like 8 or 9 classes.   This would presumably expand the Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanic to account for Submarines both acting as a counter to a class and inturn having a class counter  them.

 

Wargaming also has it in mind to introduce a weather system with rolling waves, day/night cycle, even fog mechanics which would require some fine-tuning work on  the game engine... If there doing such then its not a stretch to suggest they will also optimize the map/ocean depth to be workable for Submarines.

 

But again, EVERYTHING is subjective, nothing is absolute one way or another.

 

Yet on reddit they flat out say no plans for subs. The only reason they don't say never is because as with all ongoing games in constant development, saying never is always a bad idea.

[IronWolfV]

* sighs * And so it begins again....  

 

The greatest *beep* storm of our age.

[Pirabee]

What about each team is accompanied by two or three bot subs? Or make that a new game mode or special arrangement unavailable in random battle mode. Just saying.

 

Pirabee

[Hereticus2142]

 

Yet on reddit they flat out say no plans for subs. The only reason they don't say never is because as with all ongoing games in constant development, saying never is always a bad idea.

 

No, on Reddit said Employee bluntly said at present there are no plans to immediately introduce Submarines and reaffirmed what the Famitsu interview and Gamescom stuff has said... That its purely only on the table for discussion,  nothing is actively being worked on atm.

 

No ones crafting a 3d model, no ones working any coding, none of that... it's purely table-talk on if/how they want to do it.

 

Submarine fans, including myself, merely make the presumption that Submarines are a inevitability based on Wargamings history with certain Tanks in WoT,  but again absolutely nothing is guaranteed,  it's all just presumptions.

 

Some people tend to exaggerate the facts.

[SilentNinjaZombie]

 Please stop with Submarine post now war gamin have told you NO they get the last say in it ... why do People not listen yep they have to keep on postin Submarine post at this point admin / WG need to step up and do somthin about all the submarine post .

IF YOU WANT SUBMARINES THEN PLAY ANOTHER SEA BASE GAME

[Hereticus2142]

 Please stop with Submarine post now war gamin have told you NO they get the last say in it ... why do People not listen yep they have to keep on postin Submarine post at this point admin / WG need to step up and do somthin about all the submarine post .

IF YOU WANT SUBMARINES THEN PLAY ANOTHER SEA BASE GAME

 

Nah, it's a forum, its always going to be a topic, can't change that, ever...   Submarines have always been discussed by the fans for XYZ reason, even after the official FAQ said No Submarines.  For 5 or 6 months people still talked about it,  then the Famitsu Interview and now Gamescom has signifigantly reignited the discussion among fans of the game.

 

If you don't care for the topic... then don't read the thread?

[Noth]

 

No, on Reddit said Employee bluntly said at present there are no plans to immediately introduce Submarines and reaffirmed what the Famitsu interview and Gamescom stuff has said... That its purely only on the table for discussion,  nothing is actively being worked on atm.

 

No ones crafting a 3d model, no ones working any coding, none of that... it's purely table-talk on if/how they want to do it.

 

Submarine fans, including myself, merely make the presumption that Submarines are a inevitability based on Wargamings history with certain Tanks in WoT,  but again absolutely nothing is guaranteed.

 

Some people tend to exaggerate the facts.

 

You have a really strange interpretation of this:

 

Nope. We have no future plans for submarines. The common misquote is because we're not prepared to say "never". The reason for this is because as in something like 2 years time new technology could come along that would make submarines work. In the current game model, there is no plans to add them, the current game was built and balanced completely without their consideration.

 

Flat out says that it was misquoted at Gamescon and states the only reason they don't say never is that way later, new tech could come along to allow it. Says no future plans nor current plans. Even state the game is being balanced completely without thought of them. Basically, unlike tanks, they would need new technology to do them and if you knew anything about the Big World engine, it is not the most upgradable nor accepting of new technologies. This doesn't even leave table talk open.

 

So yes, things could change, but taking that as evidence of it coming anytime in the foreseeable future is quite frankly [edited]backwards.

[SPACEDUDE71]

It runs deep with this op.

[Hereticus2142]

 

You have a really strange interpretation of this:

 

 

Flat out says that it was misquoted at Gamescon and states the only reason they don't say never is that way later, new tech could come along to allow it. Says no future plans nor current plans. Even state the game is being balanced completely without thought of them. Basically, unlike tanks, they would need new technology to do them and if you knew anything about the Big World engine, it is not the most upgradable nor accepting of new technologies. This doesn't even leave table talk open.

 

So yes, things could change, but taking that as evidence of it coming anytime in the foreseeable future is quite frankly [edited]backwards.

 

Yeah..., that's exactly in line with what I just said... that its not in development at all and at most is just being discussed as table talk as Warships director Ivan Moroz has said.

http://www.famitsu.com/news/201507/09082751.html

[misanthrope0]

Ppl need to realise subs are not used in fleet warfare, they have no place in surface naval battle, they are used before and after a naval battle not during a naval battle. But WG will not miss out chance on making money from stupid submarine fanboy(especially German fanboy). I am betting that WG will add sub regardless.

 

Actually it was for IJN, but was never very effective, they buitl thier sube bigger an dfaster for that purpose.