Uglesett

No, because there's a huge difference between the game being mildly unbalanced but still perfectly enjoyable, and the game being an utter mess. The three main surface combatant classes are all subject to the same fundamental gameplay and work within the same restrictions. The can be balanced fairly well against each other, and in most cases they are. The main offenders are premiums that won't be nerfed due to company policy. It's when they add something that disregards the main gameplay mechanics and requires new mechanics tacked on top of the base game that they screw things up. The best case scenario with submarines as with CVs is that they will eventually reach a state where they're so boring to play that they're mostly irrelevant and rarely encountered.

They haven't done a completely balls-up job of balancing the three surface combat classes. There are some outliers that are just pants-on-head retarded, but for the most part they work. As soon as they add a third movement direction, that's when they things up. CVs have thankfully gone from "game killing" to just "nuisance" by virtue of nerfing them to the point where they're about as unpopular as they were before the rework. But it shows very well how the game just breaks down when you try to add a third dimension of movement.

Regarding the Spähkreuzer, I think she'll be more interesting as a high tier DD than as a low tier CL, and it'll also fit better with the year of design. There's probably a lot of leeway regarding balancing so they can tweak her in at several different tiers, basically T8-10 depending on what WG feels like. T9 is probably a good fit, she's basically a Z-46 that ate all the schnitzels, so she'd have more health and worse concealment than her tech tree cousin. No idea, I don't play Navyfield Historically it falls square between the german T4 and T5 cruisers, so it can be argued either way. WG doesn't seem to be that keen on low tier premiums any more, though, so I suspect if it ever gets added they'll spice it up enough to squeeze it in at T5. It'll probably not handle too differently from the Karlsruhe, since it's based on her design. There is a risk that she'll basically become German Krasny Krym, though.

No, we are talking about the 1921 design Emden, a single ship class that was an intermediary between the Karlsruhe and Königsberg classes.

Eeeh. Leander is a 1930s design armed with contemporary guns in modern dual turrets. Emden is a 1920s design armed with surplus WW1-era guns in a less efficient arrangement. Plus she displaces significantly less. Emden is more of a T4/5 ship, similar to the Phoenix/Omaha/Danae/Emerald type early interwar designs.

Erm. The main issue people had with it were the permanent bonuses that could be applied to other ships. This is basically what we were promised after they went back on that, only under a different name.

I don't think it's a particularly common association. If anything, submarines are an even more anorak-y subject than surface warships. They're not the ones you see regularly in port, and museum ship submarines are few and far between. Heck, look at other forms of media. Submarine movies are typically more psychological thrillers than they are about the combat actions.

Not really. If you talk about "naval games", my natural association are surface combatants. To some extent auxiliaries and support vessels depending on the genre of game. "Submarine games" are their own genre. Subs do their own thing.

Not submarines Subs work well as the stars of their own games (e.g. Silent Service) or in strategy games.

As arguments go, that's a bit of a cop-out. Just because something is different doesn't mean it's good or enjoyable. Masturbating with sand paper is arguably a different experience to doing it in one of the more ordinary ways, but I suspect there's only a very small minority who'd actually enjoy it. What is it about submarines that will make them enjoyable to play, while at the same time not detracting from the game in general? As someone who did play the Halloween event quite extensively, I found them to work well in a PvE environment that was specifically tailored to them. Their weapons were rather anemic by PvP standards, and the tricks that work against bots are unlikely to work against players who know what they're doing, which means that they're likely to have little impact on the battle overall as soon as the player base in general learns what to expect. CVs are actually an excellent example of something that may well add a different experience, yet at the same time detract from the game as a whole.

I liked the Halloween event. As PvE events go, it was interesting and the subs worked well in that kind of attacker vs. defender scenario. But in PvP they'd be dull as dishwater.

If they're mostly similar to the ones in the Halloween event, I don't think subs will for the most part have any significant impact on most battles. Their armament is just too unreliable and not really that powerful. Meanwhile, I suspect they'll lead to a lot more matches dragging out to be finished by capping/points because there's one pesky sub hiding somewhere.

As I said in the thread in the main gameplay forum: My prediction is that submarines are going to be frustrating for those who do not want them, while being unsatisfying and disappointing for those who do. If they're similar to the halloween subs, I doubt they will overall be able to have a major impact on most matches, while I suspect we'll see a lot more matches dragging out to be finished by capping / waiting for points to come in because one pesky sub is hiding somewhere.

My prediction: They're going to be irritating for the players who don't want them, while those who do want them are going to find them unsatisfying and disappointing.

I wonder what they'll do when the subs turn out to be dull as dishwater, and nobody can be arsed to play the special game mode for more than a couple of matches As the great Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers put it: Let's call the whole thing off.

Haven't seen it in months. I think the last time I played it I was sailing the Neptune (which was certainly an... interesting experience), and it's a fair while since I sold that ship. In the wrong ship it's a pain in the , but given how rarely it shows up it doesn't really bother me.

And what's supposed to be special about that? Newsflash: Any armour plating of 33mm thickness or more can bounce any AP shell in the game. Yamato and Musashi are the only ones that can not be bounced by 32mm plating. Heck, the Tier 1 cruisers Hermelin and Erie both have armour sections that can ricochet Yamato shells.

Aside from the fact that there are no Tier 1 BBs, did you ever read how overmatch and ricochets work? 460mm guns will only overmatch armour up to 32mm thickness. Anything above that can cause her AP shells to ricochet (and they always will if the impact angle is shallower than 30 degrees).

Yes. It'll still be less demanding than RTS cvs were.

Fly attack squadrons as now. Move fighter squadron on the minimap/overhead map as in RTS version. Problem solved.

Regarding Convoys A mode, I foresee DDs making the bot ships their waifu pillows and basically using them for cover against incoming fire.

As long as I can be "Rubber Duck".