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

ST: Submarines + New Submarine mode [UPDATED]

44 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles

Submarines are now being tested.

S-1 will be posted soon

 

NOTE: ALL OF THE SUBMARINES ARE WORK IN PROGRESS, STATS MAY NOT BE FINAL.

WG_SPb_WoWs_WIP-icon_black

 

Capture

U-69

Main stats:

Tier VI
Health 8 300 HP
Displacement 1 070 tons
Main Armament (NON-FUNCTIONAL)

8.8 cm SK C/35

1 x 1 88 mm
Torpedo Armament
Maximum Firing Range 6.600 km
533-mm 1 x 4 533 mm at the front
1 x 1 533 mm at the rear
Maximum speed 24 kts
Turning Circle Radius 660 m
Rudder Shift Time 5.19 s
Surface Detectability 4.32 km
Air Detectability 1.44 km

 

Ping

Battery
Battery capacity 410
Speed required to recharge 1/4 of max speed or less
Recharge rate 3.3 (units/seconds?)
Sonar ping
Reload time  8.0 s
Wave hit lifetime 25.0 s
Wave range 6.6 km
Wide ping
Width 1.0
Energy cost 15
Ping speed 47 kts
Narrow ping
Width 0.4
Energy cost 15
Ping speed 75 kts

 

Torpedoes:

1 x 5 533 mm
G7e/T4 Falke
Reloading Time 67 s
Maximum Distance 8.0 km
Firing angles at the front -10° to 10° (4 torpedoes)
Firing angles at the rear -10° to 10° (1 torpedo)
Damage 15 100
Flooding Chance 277 %
Speed 58 kt
Surface Detectability 1.2 km

 

 

Slot 1:
Damage Control Party
consumable_PCY009_CrashCrewPremium
Work time: 5 s
Cooldown: 40 s
Slot 2:
Maximum Depth
pcy043_submarinefourthstatepremium.png?w=780&ssl=1
Number of charges: 4
Work time: 120 s
Cooldown: 60 s
Slot 3:
Hydroacoustic Search
consumable_PCY016_SonarSearchPremium
Number of charges: 3
Work time: 60 s
Cooldown: 180 s
Torpedo spotting distance: 3.0 km
Ship spotting distance: 4.0 km
 
Edited by IJN_Katori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,546
[151ST]
Member
2,621 posts
10,461 battles

It's not official ST notes though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,184
[CLAY]
Member
2,838 posts
12,639 battles

Damn. I had hoped WG had forgot about these. Or put them on indefinite hiatus.

While they fix and add more important things.

Like MM, port interface and operations.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,273
[FORCE]
Member
2,448 posts
12,284 battles

So.... why did WG pick U-69? That sub had no record of sinking any warships.

Scout: "Enemy submarine spotted!"

Captain: "What's the name?"

Scout: "It's... *giggle*... U-69, sir!"

Captain: 

 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,582
Member
4,885 posts
8,859 battles
Just now, Sir_Feather said:

So.... why did WG pick U-69? That sub had no record of sinking any warships.

Scout: "Enemy submarine spotted!"

Captain: "What's the name?"

Scout: "It's... *giggle*... U-69, sir!"

Captain: 

69... Nice...

Pick U-420 while we're at it.

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles
34 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

69... Nice...

Pick U-420 while we're at it.

U-420 Exist. However, U-420's fate is unknown, most of her last voyage came from Antartica....

 

U-420 has been missing for alots of decades now 

 

Missing 1943-2020.

Edited by IJN_Katori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles

https://thedailybounce.net/world-of-warships/supertest-tier-vi-u-s-submarine-cachalot/ 

 

The Cachalot-class was a pair of submarines built by the U.S. Navy under the limits of the London Naval Treaty of 1930. Due to the limitations of the treaty, the Cachalot had poor patrol endurance and once the Gato-class entered service, both submarines were relegated to training duty.

USS Cachalot (SS-170) herself was launched on 19 October 1933 and commissioned on 1 December 1933. The big part of her inter-war service saw her taking part in various fleet exercises. In October 1937, she received a much-needed overhaul, including the replacement of her engines with General Motors Winston engines.

The submarine was present during the attack on Pearl Harbor but suffered no damage or loss, having only one of her men wounded. She conducted 3 patrols during the war, gathering vital intelligence on Japanese positions and had the opportunity to damage an enemy tanker during the second patrol.

With the combination of her age and poor endurance for war patrols, the Cachalot was sent back to New London in late 1942 where she served until the end of the war as a training ship. She was decommissioned on 17 October 1945 and sold for scrap on 26 January 1947.

 

Capture

 

Tier VI
Health 9 900 HP
Displacement 1 650 tons
Main Armament (NON-FUNCTIONAL)

76.2 mm/50 deck gun

1 x 1 76.2 mm
Torpedo Armament
Maximum Firing Range 10.500 km
533-mm 1 x 4 533 mm at the front
1 x 2 533 mm at the rear
Maximum speed 24 kts
Turning Circle Radius 590 m
Rudder Shift Time 3.1 s
Surface Detectability 4.86 km
Air Detectability 1.92 km

 

Ping:

Battery
Battery capacity 570
Speed required to recharge 1/4 of max speed or less
Recharge rate 3.6 (units/seconds?)
Sonar ping
Reload time  10.0 s
Wave hit lifetime 35.0 s
Wave range 10.5 km
Wide ping
Width 0.88
Energy cost 25
Ping speed 63 kts
Narrow ping
Width 0.35
Energy cost 25
Ping speed 100 kts

 

Torpedoes

1 x 6 533 mm
Mk22 mod. 1
Reloading Time 87 s
Maximum Distance 10.5 km
Firing angles at the front -10° to 10° (4 torpedoes)
Firing angles at the rear -10° to 10° (2 torpedoes)
Damage 9 750
Flooding Chance 170 %
Speed 64 kt
Surface Detectability 1.3 km

 

 

Slot 1
Slot 2
Slot 3
Damage Control Party
consumable_PCY009_CrashCrewPremium
Work time: 5 s
Cooldown: 40 s
Maximum Depth
pcy043_submarinefourthstatepremium.png?w=780&ssl=1
Number of charges: 2
Work time: 180 s
Cooldown: 180 s
Engine Boost
consumable_PCY015_SpeedBoosterPremium
 
Number of charges: 3
Work time: 120 s
Cooldown: 120 s
Effect: +8% Maximum speed

 

SUBJECTED TO CHANGE AND MAY NOT BE FINALIZED ON THE LIVE SERVER.

 

 

Edited by IJN_Katori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles

New Game mode: Submarine Warfare.

EventBattle_big

tip_arm_sonar_01

tip_arm_sonar_02

tip_arm_torpedo_acoustic_01

tip_asw_01

tip_asw_02

tip_asw_03

tip_visibility_submarine_01

tip_visibility_submarine_02

tips_arm_asw_01

tips_danger_energy_01

tips_danger_torpedo_01

tips_danger_torpedo_02

tip_con_crushdepth

tip_visibility_shoot_01

 

Details/Guides for this new mode will be soon revealed.

Edited by IJN_Katori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,273
[FORCE]
Member
2,448 posts
12,284 battles

Both subs can reach 24 knots. All T6 CVs can outrun both subs, the slowest is Ryujo which can reach 28 knots.

On the other hand, these T6 BBs are the main victims due to their low top speed:

  1. US = New Mexico, Arizona, West Virginia 1941
  2. IJN = Fuso, Mutsu
  3. UK = Queen Elizabeth, Warspite

These T6 BBs are pretty much safe:

  1. German = Bayern (barely with just 1 knot faster), PEF
  2. Soviet = Izmail
  3. French = Normandie, Dunkerque

Although to be honest, 2 of them are technically battlecruisers, kappa.

Therefore, those who beg for subs just because they hate CVs won't get their vengeance with these new toys:Smile_trollface:

Edited by Sir_Feather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,582
Member
4,885 posts
8,859 battles
1 hour ago, IJN_Katori said:

U-420 Exist. However, U-420's fate is unknown, most of her last voyage came from Antartica....

 

U-420 has been missing for alots of decades now 

 

Missing 1943-2020.

No. What the heck. Why are you serious?

 

3 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

Therefore, those who beg for subs just because they hate CVs won't get their vengeance with these new toys:Smile_trollface:

I will play some subs just to eff up those BBabies.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles
1 hour ago, Paladinum said:

No. What the heck. Why are you serious?

U-420 Existed! U-995 had the same shape of her but U-420 after 2nd commission she was lost contact and now missing for 77 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[CLAY]
Alpha Tester
1,130 posts
7,721 battles

24kts?

Give them there real top speed (surface 17kts, submerged 7kts) game over before they see another ship :cap_old:

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
875 posts
5,777 battles

Homing torpedoes.

WWII in this game is more advanced than the Cold War in the real world.

Edited by spixys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,582
Member
4,885 posts
8,859 battles
7 hours ago, IJN_Katori said:

U-420 Existed! U-995 had the same shape of her but U-420 after 2nd commission she was lost contact and now missing for 77 years.

@Sir_Feather I give up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,273
[FORCE]
Member
2,448 posts
12,284 battles

So the game mode Submarine Warfare will probably be integrated into Randoms. I mean if it would be on a separate mode, the sub-haters could avoid the games with subs easily. On the other hand the sub-haters could still go to the Scenario to avoid them. More fail Ops can be expected due to the massive influx of non PvE players:Smile_trollface:

@Paladinum Give up on what? Effing up the BBabies, or finding the U-420?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,582
Member
4,885 posts
8,859 battles
11 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

@Paladinum Give up on what? Effing up the BBabies, or finding the U-420?

On explaining that my 69 - 420 comment was NOT about any sub. It's about the MEMETIC NUMBERS.

It's EFFING 69 and 420 

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,273
[FORCE]
Member
2,448 posts
12,284 battles
17 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

On explaining that my 69 - 420 comment was NOT about any sub. It's about the MEMETIC NUMBERS.

It's EFFING 69 and 420 

Oh... I was the first that brought up the 69 though.:Smile_facepalm:

But yes I find the lack of memeology is disturbing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,184
[CLAY]
Member
2,838 posts
12,639 battles
1 hour ago, Sir_Feather said:

So the game mode Submarine Warfare will probably be integrated into Randoms. I mean if it would be on a separate mode, the sub-haters could avoid the games with subs easily. On the other hand the sub-haters could still go to the Scenario to avoid them. More fail Ops can be expected due to the massive influx of non PvE players:Smile_trollface:

@Paladinum Give up on what? Effing up the BBabies, or finding the U-420?

If memory serves, when the subs eventually do get introduced on live, it will be in a seperate mode for the purpose of testing and balancing.

This is specifically to avoid the issue WG had with the CV rework, essentially using random battles on the liver server as balance testing, upsetting everyone playing against unbalanced ships.

So randoms will be safe for the immediate future, while WG can hopefully see how subs intersect with everything else in the special mode.

But I expect subs will eventually be put into random, once all the major balancing issues are sorted out.

Or, knowing WG, once they worked it out as much as they can, realised it’s too hard, give up, and say “well, we can’t go back, and it’s as close as we can get it. throw them in randoms and call it a day”.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[TLS]
Member
4,208 posts
20,361 battles
2 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

Or, knowing WG, once they worked it out as much as they can, realised it’s too hard, give up, and say “well, we can’t go back, and it’s as close as we can get it. throw them in randoms and call it a day”.

Sounds like cv rework.

WW2 subs basically stealthily hunted transports and whatever warship that was unfortunate to run into them. The wg version is basically a stealth super torpedo launching dd.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,582
Member
4,885 posts
8,859 battles
1 hour ago, Grygus_Triss said:

If memory serves, when the subs eventually do get introduced on live, it will be in a seperate mode for the purpose of testing and balancing.

Imagine no one plays surface ships in that mode, just subs.

Imagine crying about "no sub vs sub interaction" :Smile_trollface:

 

1 hour ago, Grygus_Triss said:

 So randoms will be safe for the immediate future, while WG can hopefully see how subs intersect with everything else in the special mode.

Mark my words: subs will fit this game more than CVs ever could. CVs are not going anywhere, ot course. There will be anti-sub cultists, but I'll be there to send them to Davy Jones' locker.

 

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,273
[FORCE]
Member
2,448 posts
12,284 battles
9 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

If memory serves, when the subs eventually do get introduced on live, it will be in a seperate mode for the purpose of testing and balancing.

This is specifically to avoid the issue WG had with the CV rework, essentially using random battles on the liver server as balance testing, upsetting everyone playing against unbalanced ships.

So randoms will be safe for the immediate future, while WG can hopefully see how subs intersect with everything else in the special mode.

But I expect subs will eventually be put into random, once all the major balancing issues are sorted out.

Or, knowing WG, once they worked it out as much as they can, realised it’s too hard, give up, and say “well, we can’t go back, and it’s as close as we can get it. throw them in randoms and call it a day”.

Continuing on what @dejiko_nyo said, I highly doubt the separated testing would run long enough for WG to work on the balancing because the lack of participants for the said testing would be an inevitable issue. I mean those who don't like being used as the target practice would avoid that mode except if they enter it as subs, like @Paladinum said.

But it is still up to WG, whether they see it coming for not. Personally speaking, I don't trust WG's initial announcement about the live testing in a separate mode. WG has broken more promises than the otherwise, and this is backed by the EULA they made.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,184
[CLAY]
Member
2,838 posts
12,639 battles
2 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

Continuing on what @dejiko_nyo said, I highly doubt the separated testing would run long enough for WG to work on the balancing because the lack of participants for the said testing would be an inevitable issue. I mean those who don't like being used as the target practice would avoid that mode except if they enter it as subs, like @Paladinum said.

But it is still up to WG, whether they see it coming for not. Personally speaking, I don't trust WG's initial announcement about the live testing in a separate mode. WG has broken more promises than the otherwise, and this is backed by the EULA they made.

Yeah, that’s why I used the term “hopefully”. Since I too have doubts about people entering the special mode to play target for subs.

Though honestly, I think WG will give up quickly and say, “good enough”.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
875 posts
5,777 battles

looking forward to see the establishment of the "remove Subs" cult (as SS sounds like something else)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
260
Member
545 posts
6,731 battles
49 minutes ago, spixys said:

looking forward to see the establishment of the "remove Subs" cult (as SS sounds like something else)

"REMOVE SS!"

"Bruh if you mean that organization they're already removed in 1945. I hope you don't mean remove from the grave"

 

 

Or worse

REMOVE SSs (which just sounds like someone wanting to remove something then suddenly going full snake)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

×