Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
S4pp3R

I want your in-depth thoughts on Submarines

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,580
[151ST]
Wiki Editor
4,517 posts
16,250 battles

Per title but I'm not interested in short responses like 'broken' or 'meh' or 'fun'.

I'm after your well worded thoughts on the how and why you think of Submarines the way you do.

I'm still trying to stay aloof, but I'm pretty negative on their spotting interactions.

But I'm smart enough to know I need to play them a lot to truly understand them, which I am doing.

But how are you folks thinking about them?

Please challenge your own thoughts and ask those thoughts difficult questions.

Your input always helps me re-examine how I think about things.

Edited by S4pp3R
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,209
[LBAS]
Member
4,094 posts
21,636 battles

Honestly i don't mind it at all.

 

 

Maybe add Some Anti Air guns as functional weapons so they can finally have an Anti air against ASW Planes or other aircraft which can shoot them down. for now Submarines don't have a counter for Aircraft and their AA guns are only there as a Placeholder. (Might be another AA Rebalancing.) 

Edited by IJN_Katori
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,340
[-CAT-]
Member
6,184 posts
22,114 battles

Removing the homing torpedo would mostly cure the problem and ease the "pitchfork and torches".

Homing torpedo is a really, really good weapon.

To an extent, the weapon is so good that I feel so filthy and disgusted that I can easily do things in this ship class that is impossible to other ship classes.

Couple that being able to dive in periscope depth, with very low detection radius, and being able to both spot & hunt the opponent without the fear of getting spotted.

It can do what a destroyer can do (spotting) but better.

It's like doing a knife kill in counter strike.

 

 

Also, after WG removed the 2 km guarantee detection to submarines, destroyers and cruisers with rack based ASW became useless.

Currently, the best ASW to counter submarines would be cruisers, battleships and aircraft carriers with airstrike ASW.

Historically, we are taught that destroyers and cruisers with rack based ASW are the go weapon to for killing submarines.

However, this is a game and history does not apply here, so anyone who thinks that destroyers and cruiser with rack based ASW are the best ASW, should throw that idea out of the window.

Destroyers and cruisers with rack based ASW has a higher chance of getting killed before even getting a chance to kill submarines. Let alone a chance to drop their depth charges.

 

 

WG has spoiled and pampered the ship class to a point that it broke the game entirely.

Submarines could work. "Could".

However in their current state, they are too over gimmicked and the game master also broke a lot of the game's own rules just to shove them in and call it a success.

Not to mention monetize the eff out of them in the process.

 

 

I am deeply saddened that the game has come to this state.

 

 

 

P.S.

I am by no means a good player. I am a potato player.

But if you give submarines (in their current state) to a veteran player with experience and who knows the game's mechanics well, they can make the opponent player's life miserable and make the game un-enjoyable.

Especially new players who still does not understand the game.

Edited by S0und_Theif
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,340
[-CAT-]
Member
6,184 posts
22,114 battles

3 popular options that keeps poping out with regards to submarines (to an extent, tier 11 / superships as well).

 

Option 1 = The Preferred Option  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

- Keep them in their own game mode (Operations or Submarine Mode).

 

Option 2 = The Most Popular Option  (⌐■_■)

- Remove homing torpedo.

 

Option 3 = The Nuclear Option  (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

- Remove submarines in the game (They are not part of the original game anyways.).

Edited by S0und_Theif
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,340
[-CAT-]
Member
6,184 posts
22,114 battles

I also have a floating idea that WG should impose a hard limit the "eyes" of this game.

Namely CV and SS.

2 CV - 0 SS
1CV - 1 SS
0 CV - 2 SS

 

The game already have 2 eyes.
The game doesn't need 4 eyes.

 

WG still has not (or rather they won't) tackle the spotting issue.
Even after announcing 2 devblogs regarding CV spotting.

Edited by S0und_Theif
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,209
[LBAS]
Member
4,094 posts
21,636 battles
26 minutes ago, S0und_Theif said:

WG still has not (or rather they won't) tackle the spotting issue.
Even after announcing 2 devblogs regarding CV spotting.

Remember, we got Hybrids exist, so the IJN mainline is going to be Type B subs with aircraft and I-400 class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[KAMI]
Member
837 posts
10,274 battles

In terms of community engagement, lots of emotional and kneejerk reactions, but also many valid criticisms and suggested fixes.

 

Theres also pieces of information people seem to either neglect, or intentionally distort:

  • Subs in their current state NEED their homing torp mechanic. Their only weapon is inconsistent at range and possess only a fraction of a DD's dpm. It is certainly over-tuned atm, but you can't remove this mechanic without providing alternatives.
  • Subs' current surface detection are actually comparable to any cap-contesting capable DD. Main problem is that subs dive too fast atm, thus requiring allies to handle the shooting for the DD.

 

Lots of the possible changes I list will have been already mentioned by someone else:

  • Slow down sub surfacing and diving
  • Being damaged can block the sub from diving, or even force it to surface. DCP is required to restore this.
  • Add a restriction to prevent subs repeatedly surfacing and diving with a flat battery.
  • Nerf homing torpedo speed and/or homing. 1 gimmick is enough.
  • Require subs to be at least at periscope depth to launch attacks
  • Reduce underwater speed
  • Buff hydro's ability to spot submerged subs. Atm it is 2km for all types of hydro, regardless of them being long or short ranged.
  • Reduce their durability.
  • Re-implement the 2km guaranteed detection. Allow the sub to be spotted even when at max depth at short range.
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,340
[-CAT-]
Member
6,184 posts
22,114 battles
2 hours ago, Verytis said:
  • Subs in their current state NEED their homing torp mechanic. Their only weapon is inconsistent at range and possess only a fraction of a DD's dpm. It is certainly over-tuned atm, but you can't remove this mechanic without providing alternatives.

You also have to consider the escalation clause.

If submarines can have this nice thing (homing torpedo), then why not the other ship classes with torpedo armament.
Especially British and CWoN ships which can launch torpedoes one at a time.

 

Some genies are best left not opened.

They can bring more harm & more consequences rather than good & antecedents.

 

 

I also have read and considered your other suggestion.

2 hours ago, Verytis said:
  • Nerf homing torpedo speed and/or homing. 1 gimmick is enough.

However ships will still require to use their DCP to eliminate the ping. FDCP is limited.
And HE spam is already a thing to worry about.

 

I would replace the homing torpedo with the British swerving torpedo.
It will still have the same low damage, but you no longer have to line up your torpedo tubes (face bow or face stern) in order to make an attack run.

The down side though, shotgunning.

Edited by S0und_Theif
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
848
[VKNGS]
Member
1,588 posts
21,659 battles

I've got a couple of thoughts relating to subs.

Spotting

Periscope depth subs should be detected by radar.

I don't mind low detection on subs but the ability to disappear pretty much instantly well within detection range is a permanent get out of jail card (albeit with a likelihood of ASW plane damage happening) once you are spotted. No other class can do this without using a limited consumable, and you risk in range radaring if you smoke. I guess as a metric it's the difference between your ability to detect the enemy and your minimum distance you before you are proxy detected. 

This plays into DDs countering subs. I'd like DDs to fight subs. This was one of the historical situations, in addition to aerial ASW.

All DDs (depth charge equipped vessels?) should have the ability to detect max depth subs at close range. 

Going through a stalk to get close to a sub should be rewarded, especially when the depth charges are so ridiculously anaemic. To go from detection distance to right on top of a sub is hugely dangerous both from the sub itself and the sub's support. Once you get there you should have some ability to track the sub. Longer range if you have Hydroacoustic search, but guaranteed at say 2km/1km max depth with no use of consumable.

Given subs are not using radios without being located I would limit the sub's ability to show spotting info to its allies to those within a very limited radius, say 10km. This would allow DDs to fulfil a key historical role without risking being shot at by the entire enemy team while doing so. I'd be happy to trade off the ability of all DDs to locate a close by sub at any depth for the limited sub transmission of location of DD.

Homing Torp & DCP

The need to use a consumable to negate the ping is total crap and should be able to be achieved either through a separate consumable, or preferably some sort of player controlled countermeasure (maybe turning the ship so the ping side is hidden from the torps?). Maybe a special upgrade which can be taken to significantly reduce ping activation time, I like the need for a sub to have to give some detection signals to need to keep the ping active, "you risk damage to do damage" kind of concept.

Numbers in game

I've got one of the new T6 subs, had one game in it and the gameplay is pretty boring to me, but then so is sitting behind an island spamming HE. If it presses your buttons then go for it. I have no problems with people playing the class. A limit of 2 per side per game with 2x as many DDs as subs as the minimum requirement.   

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,993
[LBAS]
Modder, Member
7,268 posts
55,180 battles

not so fast but I'm waiting for some one could break somethings.

If u remember this [gotta wait]

CV Rework.jpg

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,073
[MRI]
Member
4,442 posts
21,827 battles

As I mentioned in other threads, subs place way too weight on the shoulders on DD players to counter, and DDs are already the most influential ship type in the game. They don't need more responsibility. However, despite being the best counter to subs, they are still woefully inadequate at doing that job. Because DDs need to get right on top of the sub to attack it, leaving them vulnerable to enemy fire. So what usually happens is the sub and the DD spot each other, sub starts diving with the DD starts evading, and the DD's team tries to throw as many shells and ASW planes at the sub before it disappears.

Which leads to the main issue with subs - they are way too survivable for the amount of stealth they have. They can outspot everything except DDs, which they match in terms of concealment. However, unlike DDs, it is very easy to avoid damage in a sub even when spotted since they can dive fast enough to avoid most incoming shell damage. And once they are at depth, they practically invisible to the enemy unless the sits right on top of them with Hydro.

All this means that the enemy only has a very narrow window to engage the sub - the few seconds it takes for the a spotted sub to dive. Sure a DD can use smoke, but not all of them have smoke, plus smoke is limited. Subs can dive as long as they have a sliver of dive capacity remaining, and dive capacity can be recharged. Radar and hydro can see through smoke, while torps and shells can still hit DDs in smoke. An underwater sub is invulnerable to all weaponry except depth charges or homing torpedoes of other subs.

And this brings me to homing torpedoes. I am fine with homing torpedoes as a concept, but they are way, way too effective. Basically unless you have DCP ready to go, you are not going to evade homing torps no matter how much wasd you do. I would rather it be nerfed slightly, such that attentive players in full wasd mode can avoid most of the torpedoes.

 

With all that said, here are my recommended changes. Some or all can be implemented depending on how things go.

Return the 2km assured spotting, even if the sub is at maximum depth. Hydro is buffed to detect subs at the torpedo spotting range if the sub is at max depth.

Subs take longer to dive.

Subs require a minimum level of dive capacity is needed before it can be allowed to dive.

Sub surface concealment nerfed slightly.

Homing torpedoes stop homing from farther out. Alternative make homing effectiveness degrade the closer the torps are to the target.

 

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
69
[T_B_L]
Member
122 posts
10,523 battles

Great, another post about submarine.

  1. Dutch cruisers, hybrid ships: ASW? What is that? For dutch cruisers, WG is very likely to assign the same slot for both HE and ASW airstrike, but they just don't fix it.
  2. Thunderer: 6km ASW, better than nothing, worse than my guns. 
  3. ASW unification is a joke: Newly released US tech tree hybrid BBs have disabled ASW airstrike, though it is possible that the post was finished before ASW unification
  4. Any ships w/o hydro: SS can sneak away right under me without being spotted
  5. Battery drained, not a problem: Charge for a few seconds and immediately dive to dodge shells
  6. Torps are reloaded in less than 1 minute, ping is reloaded in 10 seconds, double ping lasts for 1 minute, while the only way to remove the ping is using DCP in every 40/60/80 secs
  7. With consumable activated, Balao is almost capable of ascending vertically
  8. Use ripples (or whatever that is called) to locate submarine: You only need to determine the course, it's just harder than blind shooting a DD.
  9. You spot a t10 submarine, but you can't outrun it. T6 and T8 submarines are awkward under water, but T10 subs are underwater Bolt.
  10. You spot a submarine, but your ASW airstrike drops 2 DCs in a fixed angle, or in the worst case, only 1 DC. 
  11. Just solo with a bot T10 submarine in training room to see how efficient that ASW rockets on nevskhy/halland are. Oh, WG removes free T10 subs, but you can imagine it right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,683
[LBAS]
Member
2,961 posts
5,325 battles

 

#regarding homing torpedo

- PING HAVE max 2 Charge, gain 2 charge every 90 sec. if you miss once, you cannt get double pinged. if you miss both, your torpedo is not homing

- reduce single ping mark effectiveness.... 1 ping is still hooming but not as potent as double pinged. this will be choice for sub captain for risk double ping but get DCP-ed, or get single mark hooming but less effective.

- this solve the DCP issue, long range ping spam, and REJECT SEABORNE! KILL THE OCEAN!!! AND GOLDEN AGE WILL RETURN AGAIN!

 

#CL as anti sub role

- CL will have BOTH airstrike and depth charge, the airstrike of CL is twice as potent as Large/Heavy Cruiser.

- CL is currently not as strong as the Large Cruiser with massive HP or big gun. CL role is mostly supporting or suppresive. in order to reduce DD task load, a CL helping DD counter sub is good thing right?

 

#BB is too much crybabies

- BB population is TOO MUCH, and they complain too much. the only class refuse to adapt. yeah, nerf their ASW by only have 1 charge. its not their role to hunt sub anyway. they are the prey.

 

 

6w8s9p.jpg

Edited by Skarhabek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11
[LGNDS]
Member
47 posts
  • I really don't like them. In current state the submarines are given capabilities more in line with cold war attack submarines. (Speed under water, homing torpedoes, ability to attack from deeper than periscope depth.
  • Hydro was put on ships to detect submarines. I can't understand why it should be so useless against them.
  • Active sonar (the pings) in the real world is very much a two-way street. if the target you are pinging has a sonar, it will know the direction where your ping came from. I can't see why we only show that on the surface for a few seconds and then remove it. It should stay on the mini-map so we know the latest position a sub was either seen or sent an successful ping from. I find it laughable that a subs ping reach 10 km and more, while the ones on DD's only reach 3-4 km.
  • Hydroponic pings does in real world travel at the speed of sound (in the water...). That speed depends on density, i.e. depth and salinity. Having gimmicks that makes it possible to get hydro that pings "quicker" is thus against the law of physics. I know this is a game, but most other functions in the game obey physics.
  • I find it game breaking that a sub that just have been overpenned or is burning has the ability to dive. I see some other commenting on that too.
  • Radio communication when submerged IRL was limited to ultra low frequency -> messages took forever to send and receive. Subs should thus not be able to receive or send much location information unless at periscope depth or on the surface

The few cases where I find the subs being too weak:

  • IRL, subs (and surface ships) had two types of sonar. Active and passive. The passive sonar is only listening, has a long range (as long as the water has the same density) and only work if the ship using it is running very quietly (i.e low speed and perhaps not even engine running). With that a sub should be able to detect surface ships approx location from far away, and directions to subs, as long as at approx the same depth.
  • A sub should be able to replenish batteries from periscope depth, but perhaps at a slower rate.

 

Finally - can someone tell me how a cruiser from the Netherlands would defend against a submarine? I have no weapons against it, hardly any speed advantage and As soon as it dives I don't even know in what direction to run?

I guess it could be similar dilemma for the hybrid BB's & cruisers (Tone, Ise, Kearsarge)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,115
[CLAY]
Beta Tester
6,479 posts
38,101 battles
17 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Per title but I'm not interested in short responses like 'broken' or 'meh' or 'fun'.

I'm after your well worded thoughts on the how and why you think of Submarines the way you do.

I'm still trying to stay aloof, but I'm pretty negative on their spotting interactions.

But I'm smart enough to know I need to play them a lot to truly understand them, which I am doing.

But how are you folks thinking about them?

Please challenge your own thoughts and ask those thoughts difficult questions.

Your input always helps me re-examine how I think about things.

Sorry Saps.

Don't like your question at all.

I understand you may be trying to find solutions and I respect that but it's too late.

It's like asking, "I want your thoughts on eating fresh cow droppings"

And following it up with, "Don't just say 'yuck!', or 'ewww!' I want your well thought out reasons why you don't like eating fresh cow pats".

"Is it the warmth you don't like? Or is it the texture? Maybe it's the smell that you don't like?"

Don't give Wargaming an excuse to say...

"Oh you don't like eating fresh cow shit because it's too warm? Let us cool that shit down for you - there all better - now you can eat fresh cow shit"

"Oh, you don't like eating fresh cow shit because it's too chunky? Let us whip that shit through the blender - there all better - now you can eat fresh cow shit"

"Oh you don't like eating fresh cow shit because it's too smelly? Let us put this peg on your nose - there all better - now you can eat fresh cow shit"

No.

I just don't like eating fresh cow shit full stop.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,667
[FORCE]
Modder, Member
4,300 posts
18,959 battles

You have to be more specific with those questions if you actually are not bothered with the usual short answers. Because apparently some of those I'm not going to name are not even following the context you put here.

My take on sub is fairly neutral, that I neither like, nor hate them. Why? Because what they can do to my ships can also happen to the enemies. As the saying goes, "All is fair in love & war".

 

However I do notice one peculiar thing about this community throughout my entire 5 years of experience here. A lot of players are never really campaigning for an actually balanced game despite their loud noises about it on everywhere.

They say they want things to be balanced. But in reality, deep down, they want to gain the absolute dominance over the things they don't play or like.

Spoiler

Literally everyone believes they start battles as the main heroes for the team, as such they are always upset when something goes against the script of their heroic tales. While in reality, no one, absolutely no one starts as the main hero of the team. Everyone starts as nobodies, and has to actually prove themselves worthy of being considered as the heroes of their team through their accomplishments in the battle. But nope, literally everyone in the community goes full 'Mary Sue", and that's exactly what makes the community to look like kind of a mess.

You know, we have things called Achievements. And in my opinion, they are one of the good things WG implemented into the game. Although of course, a lot of those Achievements need to be reworked since a lot of them are not really to be proud of. I mean you can earn; High Caliber, Confederate, and Kraken Unleashed in one battle, but your teammates still do not consider you as someone worthy to be called the hero because your team somehow loses the battle despite your heroic effort to carry the team. The only Achievement that matters is Solo Warrior. But of course that is one of (if not) the most difficult Achievement you can earn in the game. However the difficulty to earn the Solo Warrior is aligned perfectly to the principle of the Achievements itself, all other Achievements should have followed that principle. You earn them because your accomplishment in the battle makes you deserve to be awarded, and not because you are entitled to get them regardless of your accomplishment in the battle.

So yes I really cannot take the community seriously whenever they complain about the so-called "balance". Their suggestions are always based on one perspective, themselves. But they do sugarcoat it by claiming that everyone else is onboard with their ideas. Meanwhile there are always people who play the things that the community claims that everyone hates about such as; subs, CVs, etc. You know, the loud crowd of the community is like the parliament. They believe they are representing the common people, but in reality they don't. All they care about is their own interests, but they sugarcoat it by saying that their interests are for everyone's sake.

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,580
[151ST]
Wiki Editor
4,517 posts
16,250 battles

Firstly, thanks to all for your input, it was great to read. I won't be able to respond to every point, but I have read everything.

20 hours ago, IJN_Katori said:

Honestly i don't mind it at all.

... AA...

I'm ok with Subs not having much in the way of AA, if anything I wouldn't mind a little more CV interaction with subs. But I'm not sure how that could be done better, without being devastating for Subs. Maybe minimap spotting of submerged?

19 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

Removing the homing torpedo would mostly cure the problem and ease the "pitchfork and torches".

I don't think the issue is the homing torps per se, but more pings being tied to DCP.

IMO there should be a separate consumable for it.

19 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

But if you give submarines (in their current state) to a veteran player with experience and who knows the game's mechanics well, they can make the opponent player's life miserable and make the game un-enjoyable.

What I have found after getting my head around them is that they are not a carry ship, but a complete nuisance on a flank if supported.

If supported, they end up functioning like an uncontested DD and can quickly cause a flank collapse.

However if they are constantly under pressure from a coordinated team, their zoning power is greatly reduced and they just become a DCP burner.

19 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

The game doesn't need 4 eyes.

Agreed, the saturation of so many small, stealthy ships that I've seen at time in MM needs to be curbed a bit.

18 hours ago, Verytis said:

Lots of the possible changes I list will have been already mentioned by someone else:

Largely agree but the diving/surfacing speed currently is kind of needed vs CVs, as if you get spotted, you get dumpstered.

The underwater speed issue is AFAIK only an issue with one or both of the T10s. Completely agree this needs to be fixed, but I can say with the T6, being at 1/2 speed underwater feels like a fair trade.

While I agree with torps at periscope on principle, my guess is that it would then detract from the underwater element, as it would just become used for stealth.

17 hours ago, Puggsley said:

I've got a couple of thoughts relating to subs.

I definitely agree that hydro and possibly a 'lite' version for all DDs needs to play a greater role.

If the DD can safely get on top of a Sub, it should basically be stumps for the Sub. I suspect the reason it isn't is disincentivising DDs going yolo and also to keep Subs relatively approachable for less experienced players.

But then we come back to the whole DD does too much type question...

The fact that Air ASW is the best counter to Subs really annoys me from a mechanics perspective. The ships designed for ASW end up being the worst at it. You end up hoping you don't have DCs, so you get the planes instead.

Maybe ship launched ASW should be stronger and Planes weaker?

The spotting issue, I definitely think that unless at maximum depth, a Sub should be spottable by a plane and at any depth, Hydro. At the very least, minimap spotting.

13 hours ago, stel1arX said:

Great, another post about submarine.

Thanks for engaging anyways, I largely agree with all of your points.

6 hours ago, Skarhabek said:

BB population is TOO MUCH, and they complain too much. the only class refuse to adapt. yeah, nerf their ASW by only have 1 charge. its not their role to hunt sub anyway. they are the prey.

I would jsut argue keep the number of charges but reduce damage, tilt it back towards ship-launched, i.e. what they were equipped to do.

5 hours ago, Garfield62709 said:

IRL, subs (and surface ships) had two types of sonar. Active and passive. The passive sonar is only listening, has a long range (as long as the water has the same density) and only work if the ship using it is running very quietly (i.e low speed and perhaps not even engine running). With that a sub should be able to detect surface ships approx location from far away, and directions to subs, as long as at approx the same depth.

Subs currently have a 'detect other underwater subs' sonar, hard spotting, and a silhouette sonar that gives away occasional shadows of where nearby surface ships are.

If WG gave something similar to either to surface ships, it would need to be very minor as currently ASW easily melts Subs if the team coordinates.

Otherwise, interesting points.

4 hours ago, Max_Battle said:

Don't like your question at all.

I think you may have missed my point, I'm attempting to do a video on them and run through what could be done, how they could be changed or tweaked.

I don't expect WG to listen, but I did promise this video a very long time ago, so I'm trying to do it.

What I end up with, I end up with. A lot of the ideas in here are great, I just need to think about how they could be balanced without completely destroying Submarines as a ship type.

Because regardless of what we think, they're coming.

1 hour ago, Reinhard_of_Avercland said:

My take on sub is fairly neutral, that I neither like, nor hate them. Why? Because what they can do to my ships can also happen to the enemies. As the saying goes, "All is fair in love & war".

I'll be honest, I kind of enjoy playing them. But me playing them is not fun for my enemies. I'd be much more ok with it if there was more they could do.

At the same time, they're incredibly niche, really only being good at breaking static flanks. Even in a defensive context, like what a Torp DD or IJN CA loves, they aren't great.

And this is a byproduct of their mechanics, particularly spotting.

At the moment I'm trying to think of a place they could sit in the ship-type meta, and then work out how they could be adjusted to work better.

 

But again, everyone, thank you. You have given me a lot to think about.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
564
[BELLE]
Member
948 posts
44,949 battles

My view is very limited, I unlocked the t6 German Sub and tried to complete the personal challenge of 25 ribbons in Coop.

Very hard to achieve, especially when some player Ck block you, ie put there ship in the path of your possible torps.

There is a poor attitude by players, which makes it almost impossible to give a balanced opinion. After 6 attempts and similar results, I moved on to something I could get a result in.

Aside from that I find them a challenge, and I am working on dealing with tactics to counter them in game. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,253 posts
19,108 battles
1 minute ago, SgtSullyNZ said:

My view is very limited, I unlocked the t6 German Sub and tried to complete the personal challenge of 25 ribbons in Coop.

Very hard to achieve, especially when some player Ck block you, ie put there ship in the path of your possible torps.

There is a poor attitude by players, which makes it almost impossible to give a balanced opinion. After 6 attempts and similar results, I moved on to something I could get a result in.

Aside from that I find them a challenge, and I am working on dealing with tactics to counter them in game. 

 

ping like crazy - ribbons. That is probably your best bet in co-op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,115
[CLAY]
Beta Tester
6,479 posts
38,101 battles
7 hours ago, Max_Battle said:

Don't like your question at all.

 

3 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

I think you may have missed my point, I'm attempting to do a video on them and run through what could be done, how they could be changed or tweaked.

LOL, dude, my very next line...

7 hours ago, Max_Battle said:

I understand you may be trying to find solutions and I respect that but it's too late.

😛

There is no point man.

Your video will simply be a waste of your time.

Don't beat the dead horse... that has already bolted.

Mmm mixed metaphors...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,478
Member
7,063 posts
11,684 battles

In-depth thoughts on subs?

I appreciate and almost am grateful that WeeGee brought back Operations, so I don't have to commit into the madness that is Random/Ranked and whatever development abomination there - subs included. I try to ignore subs if I have to play Random, but that's about it. Good of them to think of keeping different groups of players separated.

I don't even think subs are imbalanced or whatever, but I think they are abomination of game development.

 

TLDR:

  • I don't agree one bit about the current version of submarines. There are too many pointless new mechanics that have no business being created. Like other ship types in the game, subs should be kept simple, not complicated.
  • They should be kept in their separate mode, preferably an Operation, aka Volfpack.
  • This whole submarine venture is a shining example of sunk cost fallacy, terrible decision making, inability to listen to feedback and horrific game design/development.

 

From a gameplay perspective, submarines are not part of the kind of naval battles we have in this game. This translates to "submarines do not belong in Co-op, Random, Ranked or Clan Battles in WoWS". Kindly do NOT downplay this.

WeeGee have given them mechanics and abilities that are completely out of touch with the kind of gameplay this game has since its conception: fast-paced, gun-blazing, high-speed battles of steel between guns. What they are in reality are in deep contrast with this kind of gameplay, so WeeGee gave them things, horrible, needless things, to compensate. This is the most blatant and horrific attempt at shoehorning this game has ever seen, even more horrific than Italian BBs, and I daresay even CVs fit in this game better.

I would write more but I'd rather write about something else.

 

From a game design/development perspective, the implementation of submarines in this current state is no less than insane. And on top of that, the sunk cost fallacy of this year-long venture is like the sun shining over the Sahara Desert during daytime, even if I'm blind, I can still feel its searing heat.

KISS principle is not something WeeGee know nor care about, apparently. All this extra junk mechanics can be put into the trash, and the programmers can do other, better things, like finding and fixing existing bugs, and testing for possible bugs in future Updates. Instead, they are forced to make pointless mechanics because someone at the top are deadset on shoehorning submarines into the game.

Why even add new mechanics like "oil slick", "sonar ping" and homing torpedoes at all, when submarines can just be even stealthier DDs? If subs are too stealthy, just don't allow them to attack when fully submerged then. Why go the length of making all those extra junks, while there are simple, less intrusive (and less insane/stupid) alternatives available? This is neither efficient nor intuitive.

If submarines are allowed to have homing torpedoes then Swedish DDs should have anti-sub rockets then. Because, for Friesland-class and other Sweden-built DDs (and some others), hunting subs is their biggest designed role.

This game fits the current submarines as much as human gloves fit dog paws. If WeeGee think they need this much extra junk just to shoehorn in subs, they have admitted, without saying a word of it to the players, that the game does not support submarines in a meaningful way. If the game really accommodates subs at all, all WeeGee have to do are making underwater environment and anti-sub weapon.

This is also another example of WeeGee refusing to have some limits of what they should do. Just throwing gimmicks into a line and have the gall to call it success and publish it. A good number of RN lines, Italian lines (esp. the BBs), RN BC's bizarre new torpedoes and then a whole new ship type. All these new mechanics do NOT make gameplay deep and meaningful. It's just more convoluted and frustrating. The current state of Diablo 3 is very similar to this, there are too many complex mechanics that mean next to nothing. The stubbornness to make everything new "decidedly unique" makes many new things decidedly more convoluted, not interesting, because it's too much. 

More explanation: you can't just add things you think are cool into your game because you think other people will like it too. You CAN do this in a single-player game, but not a chiefly PvP game like WoWS and expect players to be positive about this. That's why WeeGee should make Operation Volfpack the ONLY place in the game for subs, they wouldn't even care. The players draw lines that they don't the developers to cross, but WeeGee crossed it with a swagger that counts as the sin of Pride.

This is truly throwing sh*ts at a wall to see what sticks. Doesn't matter if there are things that stick, you are throwing sh*ts at a wall, and that is disgusting.

 

I need to have a Reddit account...

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,542
[CLAY]
Member
4,154 posts
18,439 battles

My thoughst on submarines.

I feel that they just don't fit the game, neither in the real-life sense and surface warfare the game shows, and definatly not the the nature of the mechanics.

WG have had to hammer subs so hard to fit into the game, I don't think it was worth the effort.

They still; have issues, both being played and playing against.

But... they're here to stay. WG would have pulled them long before now if they were going to, but even WG falls to the sunken cost fallacy. I'm sad that WG does that, but nothing I can do about it.

My primary issues playing against them are.

  • They can out spot any DD, while being extremely stealthy themselves
  • DDs have to risk a lot to fight them. Namely being spotted and shot at by enemy ships.
  • The homing torpedoes are annoying... but mostly manageable from what I've seen. Slightly more difficult to avoid than a DD's torps, but you always know when you're targeted.

I've only played them a little, so I could not say much, but.

  • People report you just for playing them. I like my MAKRA, not going to play if I'm going to lose it just cause WG put a ship in the game.
  • Static gameplay, the forward mounted torps make it easy to just sit in a fixed position and ping a target and send torpedos. Focusing that target.
  • Low HP. You're not really coming out of a close quarter's fight alive.
  • So much focus on torpedos. Only weapon, slow reload.
  • Games too short. What you should do as a sub is wait until the game is over, then pick off the surviving enemy, meaning the enemy is weaker next time and can't get supplies...

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,580
[151ST]
Wiki Editor
4,517 posts
16,250 battles
20 hours ago, Max_Battle said:

 

LOL, dude, my very next line...

😛

There is no point man.

Your video will simply be a waste of your time.

Don't beat the dead horse... that has already bolted.

Mmm mixed metaphors...

I reference my Scenario video.

I don't think it had anything to do with WGs decision, but many of my immediate suggestions ended up being implemented...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,478
Member
7,063 posts
11,684 battles

To elaborate further on things that WeeGee could have done simpler.

RN BC's torpedo gimmick. I have not seen something so utterly stupid in this game since making Musashi T9. Why go to the length of making a whole new type of torpedoes that can change direction because their launch angle sucks aft (being holes in the hull) when they can just make deck-mounted launchers that have more HP than average. Why???

It feels genuinely amateurish.

 

Italian BBs T9 & 10. The double whammy for doubling down on making something unique, TOO unique.

Choosing designs that have too many guns -> drives up reload time, drives down accuracy.

SAP instead of HE -> also drives up reload time, drives down accuracy.

This line could have been a line of BBs with good secondary (still not as good as German or French BBs of course) and Exhaust Smoke. It is already a novelty for BBs to have Smoke, let alone max speed Smoke.

It is already questionable where WeeGee even pulled those designs from, and they added pointless gimmicks to make them even more "unique". They do NOT want players to have UP. 41 design without paying. There are TWO Up. 41 BBs in the Armory, Polo and Verdi. The tech tree has 2 abominations named Lepanto and Colombo instead.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[151ST]
Alpha Tester
124 posts
10,912 battles

Ok I will head this up with a caveat - that is "I flat out refuse to play submarines",  the reason for this is I was lied to...........so will address this from a player that plays against them.

The three biggest issues that Submarines have in regard to surface fleet players are:

Stealth - Stealthier than any DD of equal tier or pretty damn close to it - As a BB I can be easily spotted by these things, same with a CA/CL, even DD's are out spotted with ease (which leads to point 2)

Spotting - When you are as stealthy as these things any surface ship is easily out spotted. DD's trying to find submarines are the center of attention - and not in a good way

Homing torpedoes - I understand the thought that these are needed but lets take a look from a surface players point of view.   Pinged by Submarine, I now have a choice do I DCP or not......Ok double pinged and torpedoes visible, I have to DCP to lose the homing or I'm going to wear 20K damage, so DCP - Now every advantage is now with the submarine - why, well he can now ping again, his torpedoes are 1/3rd through being reloaded because that's how log it took me to see them. So he pings again, launches another spread (and lets face it with homing torpedoes its not a spread) and if in a BB likelihood is I'm wearing a full 20k plus damage, if he floods me then even more so.......having to use DCP is a killer now.

Other things I've noticed is the Divisons that play with a submarine.   Submarine to bait the use of DCP and high accuracy, long range, high chance of fire ships to support. Submarine baits the DCP, ship is then burnt, Submarine may not get the next salvo off before DCP is reloaded but the ship burning has to react to that, so played well the sub finishes off the burning ship.        

To me the solution is easy, no homing torpedoes.......point and shoot like everyone else, risk vs rewards.......you want to spam torpedoes from 8km expect your target to move and evade..........want to play with skill and a little luck, use your stealth, your underwater ability and get in close........ I can live with the stealth, but deal with the spotting issues and homing torpedoes there may be some happier players.  

Lots of other things I can think of but that's enough for now

H

Edited by H_87A_2CU
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×