Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'submarines'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 37 results

  1. Dear Captains, We remind you that the submarines are currently in Beta testing and everything you will see is preliminary and subject to change. As the pool of players who want to join the test is pretty large, we want to ensure that the test server is loaded evenly. To achieve that, we're going to distribute the first batch of invitations among a random slice of players. New invitations will be sent out during the test so as to make the Beta Test accessible to all players who wish to participate. Don’t worry If you don't find yourself in the first wave of Beta Test participants. As the test goes on, we'll be sending out more and more invitations so that every player who wishes to can eventually join the Beta Test! At this stage we invite you to check and evaluate the current concept of the game both in and against submarines. During testing, you may encounter bugs, some of which could disrupt play or cause frustration. Therefore, we firstly ask you to remain patient, and secondly, provide feedback through the survey or in this feedback thread. As part of the beta test, we will work with you to improve the gameplay of submarines, make improvements or changes and prepare for the next stages of testing. After the Beta test, which will take place over several iterations, the submarines will be added to the game client as part of a separate game mode (as, for example, it was with the Arms Race, Rogue Wave or Space Battles). This will allow us to test under main server conditions, with a larger number of participants as we make the finishing touches and adjust the balancing of the new class. Only after all these steps have been taken will we decide on the fate of submarines. We want to be sure that: the gameplay of submarines will appeal to the majority and they fit well into the game and do not create technical problems. Thank you for participating, we very much look forward to hearing your feedback!
  2. Hello fellow gamer people, I am writing this as I'm more than a little concerned with the current state of the game in general, the direction it appears to be going, and several other concerns regarding things like customer service and transparency. It may end up being a long post and maybe in more than one part, and, just to be clear, these are only MY opinions, you can agree or disagree as you see fit and I welcome constructive comment, however trolling because you haven't had enough attention today will be reported. First, a brief description of myself mainly for insight as to where I'm coming from with all this. I suppose I'm a whale, probably a Blue Whale If I'm going to be honest. Over the years I have given Wargaming a lot of money, thousands most likely, ok not likely, It's a fact, since starting playing tanks nine years ago I have spent?, invested? money, though I'm not going to think about that too much, but I game a lot. I'm also a bit of a Cliche, I'm 52 and live with my parent's, although I'm not In the basement, and am not antisocial, I do have friends and like a drink once or twice a week, but due to circumstances and family health issue's I'm back home and have a lot of free time. I've played games and built computers for 32 ish years ever since 4mb of ram was a big deal. I'm not an expert on gaming but I have a lot of years In the area. So, on to the meat of the subject, Wargaming, what are they doing, why are they doing it, and are they doing it for us?. Well, and again, my opinion, no, no they are not doing it for us, or if they THINK they are, they are not listening. I'm going to break it down, firstly by game type, then class and at the end I'll touch on the business side of things I suppose. So Game types, Random: I actualy have very few issue's with random, other than camping and skill level's of some players It's not too bad, with a couple of exceptions, but I'll address those In the class section. Co_op: Sorry but shouldn't we rename this DD-oP?, trying to get anywhere with , let's say, a bb Is 90% of the time (random % pulled out of thin air) pointless, by the time you get to engage half the time, the game is over and the Destroyer's have gobbled all the Exp, not a go at Destroyers, but the Mechanics of the game mean rushing forward and torp'ing is the way to go. How to fix? *&%@ if i know. Ranked: It's painful, I have seen people defending it, but as a reasonably skilled player who is just not good enough to carry hard I find ranked horribly frustrating. The amount of games in the last sprint I've lost due to players either rushing straight in and being sunk in the first two to three minutes, Going off alone down a flank in a BB....and getting sunk in the first two to three minutes, or sitting in a position that they are unable to make any difference to the game, until team is dead and they are outnumberes etc....... well a lot of you know what I'm trying to say. As of right now, ranked does not reward you as a player for playing the game, it relies on a team effort, and trying to get a lot of the players to work together Is Impossible. I've ranked out then next time never got passed rank 9 etc. Completely Inconsistant. Clan Battles: Borked, CV's, Stalin Rico's everywhere, etc. Only just started playing CB, but first impression's, while ok funwise, I just don't get some WG decisions. So CV's, why am I unimpressed with them in Clan Battles, well they completely take away using the Element of surpise / positioning. CV in game? yup, Flank from an unexpected place/angle to try get an advantage? nope, you were spotted four day's ago by planes that can perma spot you while you can do nothing to mitigate it, now that's a GREAT game design . So, coal / steel ships, you know I wouldn't give a flying If It wasn't for the simple fact that Wargaming don't even attempt to balance, and I know some of you are going to say I'm wrong, but let me be blunt, IF I'm wrong, why the hell was everyone who had them, using them?, how many other ship's did you see, how many Henri's, Mino's?, Ibuki's?, not many from my experience. While I'm not expecting every ship to be practicle, having only 4 or 5 being the Go To ship's just scream's Imbalance to me. I'd like to know what the % WR of CB's with CV's in was and then have skill level like for like factored in and a nice big bar graph putting out as well. I don't have issue with CV's being in game(See class DD's later for further comment), but honestly think they take too much away when It come to Clan battles. Sceanrio: no problems other than they should reset rewards each cycle of each scenario. So Class next I guess: Battleships: At some point Wargaming were going on about trying to get BB's to be more active in the game, everyone was sat at the back, hiding behing Islands and sniping, Battleship brawling was only happening late game when pretty much everything else was dead or one team was done for and out of options. Well, that hasn't worked has it. BB's now camp like they forgot to weigh anchor, and to be honest I can't really blame them. New ships introduced make It pretty much suicide to push early to mid game (though I personally do try now and then for lol's), Smolensk, Worcester, Halland etc. have pretty much turned the game into a campfest, which Is not as fun, also certain BB's just seem to be inferior to others due to power creep, or unique flavour (Thunderer armour / Citadel anyone). Cruisers: I think they are probably best class in game at moment, they do pretty much everything at least to a decent degree, and some of them excel in certain areas. Want a Denial ship, Smol, Worcester etc. AA Des, Salem, Utility, Stalin, Des, Moskva, an answer to every problem lies somewhere In one of the MANY cruisers and with the new lines we have even more to choose from. They can wreck BB's, hunt destroyer's, provide AA, I can't think of anything that they are bad at, with a few expcetions pertaining to specific cruisers. The only issue I have with them Is again that some just seem too powerful when compared to others of same tier. CV's: Currently I think they are the equivalent of Arty in World Of Tanks, I don't think Wargaming truly know what to do with them, got close(ish) to having them balanced and then gave up. Spotting Mechanic Is just bad, being perma spotted and not being able to do anything about It Is just a bad Idea and takes so much away from the game as far as strategy is concerned. I think AA on some ships needs BUFFING (yes, I said it, so sue me) I also think that Ships detection range from the air should be equal to the LR AA umbrella of the ship being spotted and that ships should be able to detect the plane's at Maz AA range, so spotting has some cost. I also thin MM needs looking at, If you have ever been a bottom tier DD and had to face a CV two tiers above you, well yeah that's fun, sure you can stay at the back and hide with the cruisers / bb's, but isn't that the complete opposite of a DD's purpose (generally, yeah we have exceptions). I played a French DD the other day as an experiment for several games, no smoke and meh AA, every time I had a CV in game, well, It was bad, and If the CV was two tiers higher, It was bad, but not for long.... DD: Over taxed and soon even more so. CV's are a nightmare, Radar is everywhere, Hydro, sub's on the way (oh lord I hope not) I think, again with exceptions, that DD'ss are the hardest ship to play at the moment and when/If Sub's come then, well I don't know, will people just stop playing them?. Teams want you to spot or cap but at the moemnt your life expectancy a lot of the time Is pretty short if you even attempt, it. "Cap C" ok I'll go cap C, oh damn, planes incoming, no problem, I'll smoke up he will never see me , Oh damn, radar from a cruiser 12k away, behind an island....with a Smolensk , oh and look, those rocket planes are coming back, It will be ok, happy thoughts, happy thoughts, happ..."Return to Port?" ho hum. Subs: not played them, don't want them, special game mode please thanks. From what I have seen on YT etc at the moment, they are nowhere near balanced. I am still trying to figure out as of now what a BB is suposed to do In a one on one with a Sub, Raise a white flag?. My answers to some of the problems that >I SEE< : I'd get rid of Radar and bring a little tension back to the game, "what's behind this Island?, I don't know, should I go look????? ewwwww what to do!!!", give more ships Hydro maybe to counter lack of radar, get rid of proximity spotting, above changes to CV spotting, Change MM so dd's are not uptiered with CV's two levels higher and deleted in first couple of minutes (or) Change rocket dispersion V DD's maybe, make them harder to hit, take cv's out of comp gaming. I would also like to see WG go back and balance ALL ships so they all serve a purpose, probably not realistic but hey. Zao, Henri, Mino to some extent are under played, anyone wonder why. Possibly look at rewarding active play and penalties for innactive play. Stop releasing ships that skew balance badly or are a bit silly in a specific are. Wargaming: Firstly, they are a business, they are not here because they love you, they are here to make money, and I am fine with that. What I'm not fine Is the downright vile methods they use to get that money. Loot box gambling In the Armoury for progression is just BAD and a horrible money grab, the whole PR fiasco was offensive and again IMHO an intentional money grab by WG, I truly beleive If the stink that was created regarding It hadn't occured they would have carried on with the concept. The current Dock Isn't as bad, In fact I look at It as simply a way to get a discount on a ship If I want to. I don't mind things like the Xmas Box's got to say, they are far enough away from the game itself to be out of mind, but something that you are actively taking part in via missions... another story. Premium ships, the prices are ridiculus, I have never seen a comment from WG regarding the pricing they use, but as hundreds have said before me, having a single in game ship costing the same as AAA title, and in some cases a couple of AAA titles, Is greedy, and let's be honest, they seem to knock them out at a insane rate, what is it, when you include reskins? One a week, two?. And yet how often do we see a new maps released?, game modes?. Yes they give stuff away, but a fair few have been pretty awful, others some are older ships that many people may have already bought...they ain't stupid that's for sure. I don't know If they even take note of feedback, LWM is probably the most level headed and does some pretty amazing and detailed reviews and has commented a lot on what she thinks a particular ship may need, both buff or nerf to be a good, balanced ship but do WG listen? do they care? do they try to give us, the gamers what we want or is it more of a case of they give us what they SAY we want, I don't know, I am starting to come around to the idea that a lot of it is just hot air and smoke. When I first started playing, the game was totaly different, far more balanced and after the way Tanks has gone downhill, a breath of fresh air, but now I'm starting to think that that was just the hooks going In before they reverted back to same old same old. I hope I'm wrong, the game isn't broke beyond repair, it just needs a little nudge here and there. Oh yeah, Wargaming, out of interest, you know those server transfers you promised NA to EU for world of tanks, like over two years ago, you know, the subject you point blank refuse to acknowledge on your forums any more in World of Tanks? well as you refuse to respond on THOSE forums how about someone reach out to them from here and find out WTF is going on? you now, customer service, valued customers, transparency, Integrity, honesty and so on??, I mean I know Wargaming didn't do a complete U turn and just not tell the customers, that would be a completely shameful way to treat the player base wouldn't it? just asking anyway, probably a metric tonne of spelling mistakes and punctuation error's and trolls have probably smelled blood and are crawling out from under the bridges, but I'm trying. Srgt_Misfire Deep Impact EU "I may be old n slow kid, but I still sunk you"
  3. Hello everyone, I was lucky enough to get submarines on my first bundle and I played a few battles - really, just a few. I will go on to say here, that I am biased. I love submarines. I have played many sub simulators, from the old Red Storm Rising and 688 Attack Sub, to Jane's Simulation to Silent Hunter. Naturally, I was curious how WG would implement submarines and I am here to share my first impressions. Graphics The ships look good! The submerged environment is... adequate. I guess it conveys the uncertainty of not being able to "see" anything. Handling The handling is... clunky. I mean, it does its job (I suppose), but suddenly having to maneuver in 3 dimensions can get overwhelming at times. May I suggest hotkeys for set depths? Like "surface", "periscope depth" and "crash dive", or something like that? Speed The speeds are unrealistic, but they fit the game, I find. I like the battery mechanic, which limits underwater speed (artificially) to 1/4. To be honest, submarines *could* be a little slower. They seem to be able to get into position - and move out of ASW threat areas - pretty easily. Visibility/Detection/Spotting It's ok, though it may have to be tweaked a bit. You are very hard to spot as a submarine, except by destroyers - which is as it should be, really. Spotting the destroyers is a little too overpowered, I think. You can even be on the surface and just keep the reds spotted. It's not much fun, but it's possible. I find aircraft have an exceptionally hard time spotting submarines - time for special planes or consumables? I don't know if the submarines are meant as a counter for the CVs, because it is possible - even relatively easy - for a submarine to traverse the whole map and go kill the CV. It's not the most useful thing, but it's possible. Attacking I found the range on the German sub to be very short. The Cachalot fit my gameplay much better (and I shortened the range to 8.4 km, in exchange for torpedo speed). This is it, isn't it? Attacking! Well, I found that WG did some things well and some not so well. Attacking with torpedoes can be... boring! The ping mechanic is underwhelming, in my opinion. I "hit" often enough, but it's all chaotic and clunky and inelegant. And the torpedoes miss anyway - except on battleships. On threats like destroyers or Leanders, ironically, yolo'ing works just fine. Surface 2 km from the target, fire all 4 tubes and kill. Or die. I do like the back tubes, which gives excellent opportunities to fire while "retreating". In general, as a sub captain, you have to think of positioning and approach angles. Much like in reality, you can't just chase targets. You need to lay an ambush. Islands are good for that, but mostly look at the mini-map, expect the enemy's movement and... you know the rest. Los! A word of advice to cruisers and destroyers: Broadside seems to be better than angled. It's harder to land pings against fast-moving targets. Special section: Sub vs. sub action (sounds dirty, I know). It's ok. I find it much easier to ping subs, I guess because they are slower. Depth changes make it interesting, but also chaotic and - again - inelegant. Defending I found defending against some DDs and Leanders to be exciting! Plus, they have a good chance to actually kill you. It does feel that the "attack runs" are scary. Sure, the results are a bit random, but that's not a bad thing. You can't actually aim depth charges, they are kind of a catchall weapon. In general, it seems relatively easy to defend. Against aircraft for sure, just dive. Against ships, it's a little harder and if you encounter an experienced captain, much harder. Again, think about positioning, don't just run into the melee with 3 DDs. Epilogue These are, again, just first impressions. We will see how it all turns out. In all, I found the submarines relatively "boring", with thrilling interludes. More often than not, they are irrelevant. The battle just passes you by. I have yet to do much damage, 38k was my maximum, I think. I hope you enjoy the submarines and share your thoughts! o7
  4. While the balancing problems are the most consequential for the larger playerbase regarding counterplay and interaction, the even bigger issue for me in terms of submarine longevity is the (admittedly subjective) boring/repetitive experience of aiming the acoustic torpedoes, which makes submarines almost uniquely boring to watch and leaves little room for genuinely 'new' submarine gameplay going forward as new lines/premiums are added. I think submarines could be balanced eventually in terms of surface interaction from the many suggestions already put forward, particularly forcing them to spend more time on the surface and making them more vulnerable in transition between depths. Depth charge armed aircraft would certainly give some form of recourse, though preferably they would be 'aimed' to some degree so as not to be a repeat of the boring 'defAA' mechanic for submarines, perhaps they would not inflict lethal damage, but have a high flood/fire chance that forces a submarine to surface and repair. Thinking about how to make the actual combat mechanics of the submarine more engaging while leaving potential for variation, though there are many different possibilities and pitfalls to consider, my suggestion would be a system of arming as oppose to tracking: Torpedoes are fired in a 'disarmed' state and must be 'armed' by the submarine 'pinging' the moving torpedo itself (or discreet torpedo salvo). Torpedoes have different behaviours between the two states, for example, disarmed torpedoes do not alert opposing players of their approach (though the wake may still be spotted). Torpedo 'citadels' are related to the timing at which the torpedo is armed, trading off timing/distance and torpedo speed states to adjust the difficulty of the shot. So, let's use this basic framework to imagine a different arming mechanic for different national flavours to create some genuine variation in submarine combat: 'US version': Torpedoes move slowly, but invisibily in disarmed state (perhaps deeper underwater?), allowing them to creep close unseen. Once armed, the torpedo accelerates to high speed rapidly. If armed immediately before impact, it causes citadel damage. 'German version': Torpedo moves at an average constant speed with a visible wake, more like a typical surface torpedo. Once armed, following a brief fuse in which citadel damage is possible, the torpedo detonates causing splash damage based on proximity, perhaps with a higher chance of module damage. 'Soviet version': Something like the inverse of the US counterpart, the torpedo moves quickly (with a visible wake) in a disarmed state, but slows down significantly once armed. Citadel damage is active several seconds after arming point, meaning the torpedo must slowly cruise to target for a time to score a citadel. These are just a few examples of how to get creative with arming time to challenge the player in more varied ways when trying out different lines of submarines, hopefully the feedback of pulling off a successful arming ping would feel as visceral as scoring a citadel with gunfire. It might help provide exciting footage if the arming ping is followed through the water to target so you can watch your well aimed torpedo strike home. While I think it may be possible to make acoustic torpedoes more interesting than they are currently implemented (more direct aiming rather than just bow/stern pings) I feel they should be a lategame rarity as befitting them historically. What do you think? Do you find the current acoustic targetting system has excitement enough in scoring a hit? Do you think whiffing a ping on a well targetted torpedo would be too frustrating? Do you think intentionally sailing into as yet disarmed torpedoes makes for good surface counterplay? Can you envisage any alternative combat mechanic that would at least make future submarine gameplay replays more exciting to watch?
  5. Is the anemic presence of battleships in the submarine game mode indicative of the viability even future of the whole class?
  6. Howdy, all! Like many of you I've been trying submarines (SS) on PTS and now the live servers in their game mode. There are a number of issues and rather than just rant about them, I thought it'd be helpful to put my thoughts together in one handy guide. Submarine Improvement Guide (PDF) Also interested in hearing your thoughts as well!
  7. Yamashiro42

    Some questions regarding the submarines

    What skills should I pick for the submarine commanders? So far I only played them in that Halloween mode. Does LS have any benefit (how often does the engine or rudder break compared to DDs or CLs)? Does broken rudder affect only course steering or also diving/surfacing steering? Do the secondary guns benefit from BFT/AFT/DE/IFHE? Is it worth/needed to take TA? Does JoaT reduce time between sonar pings or are the pings considered a weapon - if so, does it benefit from TAE, BFT or AR?
  8. Is it correct that we have to wait until the 27th to play submarines ? Often there is wargaming banners displaying and advertising submarines since months on websites, the banner ads lead to the games website - But no submarines are in the game. Very misleading :(
  9. Hi all, Am I reading this right: If WoWs v0.9.5 = Russian/Soviet Cruiser Split then WoWs v0.9.4 = Submarines ? The WoWs "Public Test" v0.9.4 will now have submarines for general testing... Leo "Apollo11"
  10. I only made it to 369K in the early CV rework versions with the Midway, due to business travel I could only play game version 0.8.0 for 48 hours and also could not participate in the Haku torp spam :( How high do you think the damage record on any kind of Submarine will be, once it is playable in random matches ? Wishing everyone a nice week :)
  11. Hey there folks, With Submarines being in testing since a while a while back, I have wondered why WG have decided to start the Submarine Tech Trees at Tier 6. There are quite a few classes of submarines from the WW1 and inter-war period that could be used for lower tier submarines. The myriad of U-boat classes of the Imperial German Navy and the N- and O-classes of the U.S. Navy come to mind here. What are you guys thought on this subject? Is there a place for lower tier submarines, and if so, should the trees start at Tier 2 or Tier 4?
  12. Do you think Submarines will come in 2019 ?
  13. Hello, fellow forumites! About the forthcoming introduction of submarines, there is one aspect in particular that I'd like to adress, namely their effect on destroyer gameplay. As a class that relies to a great extent on stealth and manoeuvrability, the destroyer is extra sensitive, balance-wise, to any change in the stealth meta. I can hardly see how submarines can fail to affect stealth play in a big way. We know, as yet, very little about the details of submarine gameplay, and this is hardly surprising since there is - as yet - very little to know. But from what I've seen in the videos by iChase and others, and read on this forums, I can at least begin to make some educated assumptions. We can assume that submarines will have the highest stealth rating in the game. Even on the surface they will probably be able to out-spot most, or maybe even all, destroyers. Once they go to periscope depth, their stealth advantage becomes even greater, although they lose mobility to compensate. And if push comes to shove, they can submerge fully and - with added mobility - make an expeditious retreat. As for weapons, they have no guns of any kind, but they do have homing torpedoes. In iChase's recent videos of submarine gameplay, the odds seemed to be fairly even in a straight-up duel between a submarine and a destroyer, although I'd guess that a destroyer that manages to avoid getting torpedoed during the initial attack, would probably hold the advantage. But this is in a situation where there are no allies on either side to provide fire support. If the destroyer had to conduct his manoeuvres while under fire from the allies of the submarine, things would be much different. Based on this, I can see the following scenario taking place in a typical scouting or capping contest between a submarine and a destroyer, early on in the battle. A. The submarine (in surface mode) and the destroyer both approach the cap zone. The destroyer is spotted first, and immediately comes under fire from the enemy team. If the destroyer disengages at this point, the submarine will have won the engagement. If the destroyer pushes on, go to B. B. As the two ships close in on each other, the submarine goes to periscope depth and thus remains unspotted. It starts to reverse, and fires homing torpedoes at the destroyer. Meanwhile, the destroyer - which remains spotted and is kept under continuous fire - starts to take some serious damage. If the destroyer disengages at this point, the submarine will have won the engagement. If the destroyer pushes on, go to C. C. The destroyer may take one or more of the submarines torpedoes, in which case it will either sink or be forced to withdraw, or it may dodge them and push on. In the latter case, the destroyer - who is significantly faster than the submarine - swiftly comes close enough to proximity spot his enemy, and opens fire. The submarine takes a few hits, and immediately submerges fully. Since a fully submerged submarine continues to proximity detect ships on the surface (without being proximity spotted in return), the destroyer remains spotted and will probably be sunk by incoming fire before it has time to conduct a depth charge run. When this happens, the submarine will have won the engagement. To sum it all up: If a submarine has even moderate back-up from its allies, I can't see how it could lose this sort of engagement other than through some serious mistake or misplay of its own. Obviously, there are many other parameters to consider in a scenario such as the one described above. A destroyer equipped with hydro, for instance, would presumably have a much greater chance of avoiding the homing torpedoes, and unless submarines are given magical anti-hydro capabilities, it should also be able to use the hydro to locate submarines at greater distances. And the good old "Vigilance" skill may perhaps see a renaissance. But these are all details in a much bigger picture - namely the supplanting of the destroyer as the most stealthy ship class in the game. How will this affect destroyer gameplay, and how will it change the overall balance between ship classes? I have intentionally painted a bleak picture of the future. I am hoping for counter-arguments, showing that the scenario I've envisioned above will not come to pass. I don't claim to be able to predict what will happen. But I know what I don't want to happen, namely to see the destroyer reduced to the role of second-line torpedo spammer. Launching torpedoes from second line is not only a war crime in itself (joking, here), it is also a damn boring way of playing what I personally regard as the most fun, mobile and challenging ship class in the game. And before you say it, no - neither the carrier rework nor such game mechanics as radar and hydro, have yet been able to relegate the destroyer to second line. The game environment has changed more than once since this game's inception, but the gunboat destroyer still is where it has always been - in the middle of the action, fighting at close quarters with the enemy in the glorious grand melêe. I sincerely hope it will remain there. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this matter, captains and gamers all! Cheers! Edited: After putting up this thread, I learned from another poster - courtesy of a link provided by @Cagliostro_chan in post #23 below, thanks a bunch! - that fully submerged submarines will indeed proximity detect surface ships, without being proximity detected by them in return. It follows that the odds are even more heavily stacked against the destroyer, than I reckoned with at first. I have amended paragraph C in my above scenario accordingly.
  14. Right so, a bit of a long one this. Anybody who dislikes long posts can read the TLDR at the very bottom. Attention MODS - This relates to the COUNTERS for subs and thus I think it should be treated as it’s own distinct subject. Disclaimer – I’m a history buff and indeed I deal with certain elements of this in the line of my work (history of aviation side of things) so some ‘real-life’ arguments will come into this. This is a bit more of an explanation as to why I think the sub inclusion will be a headache - feel free to point out flaws in the logic or add your own suggestions. I've spoilered each section to keep the size down because I'm jolly nice like that. =) General ASW Issues Weapon Specific Issues - Detection TL DR The counters for subs are going to be the make/break for subs being shoehorned into WOWS. Nothing they’ve done recently dispels the illusion that WG really do fumble around when it comes to fine tuning balance between the classes (cough rework cough). I also think that the ship-sub interaction will be a massive pain in the backside for everyone concerned. The yo-yo in the AA ship/CV balance is evidence of this and that in many ways is MUCH simpler than the truly three-dimensional nature of Ships vs. Subs.
  15. Dear WG, next to our beloved CV`s - Please add Submarines to the regular game and the ranked mode as soon as possible. Thank you very much :)
  16. Isoruku_Yamamoto

    German submarines/ Diveboats/ U-boats

    So i was having a discussion on submarine implementation and i was thinking to myself hey, the german U-boat development would offer some great options on this. So i made a raw draft of how you could fill a tech tree with german Subs- although i could probably also come up with US, Dutch and Japanese subs- if not more classes. I took the german ones first as i consider them to have a really neat historical development which you could put into the game nearly 1 on 1. Suppose you'd want a tech tree to start around tier 3- from the DD line i guess. You could even say that you'd only start at tier 5, but the typically slow gameplay of submarines would also quite fit the lower tiers i suppose. Even within the VII series, you could take the VIIA, VIIB and VIIC/41 as three follow-up ships due to improving characteristics between them. Then you could follow up with varieties on the IX boats as high-tiers (tier 8-9 or 8-10) and have the XXI sit as the tier 10, which is a ship that can really stay underwater for long times. while the lowest tiers can be filled by the Type I, II and VNow i mentioned 8 varieties so far, so if you'd start at tier 3 it can simply be this3: Type I4: Type II5: Type V6: Type VIIA7: Type VIIB8: Type VIIC/419: Type IX10: Type XXIPremium Tier 8: VIIC/ 42 (increased diving depth, submerged & surface speed, slightly increased torpedo reload speed, at the cost of manoeuvrability) Main characteristic of the german tree: good surface speed, 4 forward tubes and 1 aft tube, long ships which are reasonably manoeuvrable but cant go through tiny corners, good depth performance, weak AA, good diving performance but poor oxygen supply & poor resurfacing. Only Type XXI has good oxygen reserves. Torpedo ranges 8-12km, damage 12-23k, speeds 50-80knts, depending on tiers. Reload times should be long, around the 1 minute mark i think Grtz Isoruku_Yamamoto P.S. Topic is work in progress
  17. vojtaruner

    Fan made German submarine tech tree

    Hello everybody, I have put together history and possible implementation of the German submarines in World of Warships. Please keep in mind that this is just fan made, not official news of upcoming new ships. Also I apologize for any grammar mistakes, english is not my native tongue. I would love to see submarines in WoWs, but I also don't want to destroy this game. If Wargaming wants to implement submarines in Random battles, then they need to do it carefully. Also, I think that minelayer submarines won't make it into the game. Please keep in mind, that submarine's characteristics (speed,...) are historically accurate and will be (most likely) changed. Reason is simple- speed of submarines is low and if they want to be competitive, it should be changed. However, speeds of submarines, which are showed here, are good if you want to compare submarines from different tiers. Adding submarines in game is only possible after the other issues in the current state of game are solved. It is hard to say how would look submarine branch, if it make it into the game, because there isn't any other submarine branch to compare these submarines to. If submarines would be implemented in game, I bet, that German tech tree would be the first that comes to mind. Also, if submarines come to the game, all ships should be adapted (anti-submarine warfare...). I think that submarines could have the same mechanics for reloading the torpedoes as in Halloween event. However, the maximum depth, where can be submarine submerged, could be changed from tier to tier or by upgrading the hull of submarine. At the beginning, submarines could have only 2 different depth levels, where they can be submerged. At higher tiers, for example Type VIIC or Type IX, they could have maybe 4 different depth levels. If submarine runs out of air, she would be forced to the surface, where she begins to replenish her air supplies. I start my tech tree at tier IV. Reason for that is simple. At tier IV, new players have a decent knowledge of game mechanics, so if they meet submarines, they should be capable to counter them or know approximately how to react and they know their ships quite well. Main line: Tier IV Type II Displacement: -surfaced: 254 t (Type IIA) 279 t (Type IIB) -submerged: 303 t (Type IIA) 328 t (Type IIB) Length: 40.90 m (Type IIA) 42.70 m (Type IIB) Beam: 4.081 m (both hulls) Draught: 3.83 m (Type IIA) 3.90 m (Type IIB) Speed: -surfaced: 13 knots (Type IIA) 13 knots (Type IIB) -submerged: 6,9 knots (Type IIA) 7 knots (Type IIB) Secondary armament: none (both hulls) Torpedoes: -bow: 3 × 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes (both hulls) AA defence: Short range: none (Type IIA) 1x20mm (Type IIB) Quick history: The Type II U-boat was designed by Nazi Germany as a coastal U-boat, modeled after the CV-707 submarine, which was designed by the Dutch dummy company NV Ingenieurskantoor voor Scheepsbouw den Haag (I.v.S) (set up by Germany after World War I in order to maintain and develop German submarine technology and to circumvent the limitations set by the Treaty of Versailles) and built in 1933 by the Finnish Crichton-Vulcan shipyard in Turku, Finland. It was too small to undertake sustained operations far away from the home support facilities. Its primary role was found to be in the training schools, preparing new German naval officers for command. It appeared in four sub-types. Notes: I wanted something simple to begin this branch with. That's why I've chosen training coast submarine from WWII, instead of WW I submarine. In World of Warships: There would be 2 hulls: Type II A and Type II B This is simple submarine. She is small, maneuverable with great concealment and forward facing torpedoes. She can't be underwater for long time, but she can replenish here air quickly(-> friendly towards beginners). Type II Tier V Type U 66 Displacement: -surfaced: 791 t -submerged: 933 t Length: 69.50 m Beam: 6.30 m Draught: 3.79 m Speed: -surfaced: 16.8 knots -submerged: 10.3 knots Secondary armament: 1x8.8 cm SK L/30 naval gun Torpedoes: -bow: 4x1 45 cm (17.7 in) -stern: 1x1 45 cm (17.7 in) AA defence: Short range: none Quick history: The Type U 66 was a class of five submarines or U-boats operated by the German Imperial Navy (German: Kaiserliche Marine) during World War I. The class is alternately referred to as the U-66-class or the Type UD. The class was built by Germaniawerft of Kiel to their 506d design as the U-7-class for the Austro-Hungarian Navy. The five boats were sold to the Imperial Germany Navy at the beginning of World War I when it was thought impossible for the submarines to reach the Mediterranean for delivery to Austria-Hungary. All five boats saw active service, and four sank 18 or more ships. Only U-68, sunk six days into her first war patrol in March 1916, had no successes. Two other boats, U-66 and U-69 disappeared in 1917. The remaining two U-boats, U-67 and U-70, were surrendered to the United Kingdom and were broken up by 1921. Notes: 8.8 cm (3.5 in) SK L/30 deck gun, later replaced by 10.5 cm (4.1 in) SK L/45 deck gun This is the only submarine from WWI in this tech tree (not counting premium). I wanted more WWI submarines, but I found it difficult to integrate these submarines. However, I think later, I could make alternative beggining of this branch, where these submarines could be. Why did I choose Austro-Hungarian submarine, that was in service of Germany? I wanted to prepare players for stern torpedoes. Here is only 1, but later there are 2 for example (Type IX). If you don't want to use stern torpedoes, then you lose only 20% of your fire power (4 bow, 1 stern torpedo tubes). Later, for example on Type I or Type IX, you would lose 33% of your fire power (4 bow, 2 stern torpedo tubes). This ship should prepare you for stern torpedoes on higher tier. In World of Warships: In comparison to previous tier, Type U 66 has more torpedoes, secondary armament (still, you shouldn't rely on secondaries), speed, hitpoints an can stay longer submerged. However, this comes at a cost. She has worse concealment, worse damege per torpedo hit, turning radius and takes longer to replenish her air. Type U 66 Tier VI Type I Displacement: -surfaced: 862 t -submerged: 982 t Length: 72.39 m Beam: 6.21 m Draught: 4.30 m Speed: -surfaced: 17.7–18.6 knots -submerged: 8.3 knots Secondary armament: 1x10.5 cm (4.1 in) SK C/32 naval gun Torpedoes: -bow: 4x1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes -stern: 2x1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: 1x20mm C/30 Quick history: The Type I U-boat was the first post–World War I attempt by Nazi Germany's Hocheseeflotte to produce an oceangoing submarine. Only two Type IAs were built. Although the boats did not have any major design faults, they were known to be difficult to handle due to their poor stability and slow dive rate. The type was based on the design of the Finnish Vetehinen class and the Spanish Type E-1. The design later served as a basis for the development of other types of boats, primarily the VII and IX classes. Constructed by Deschimag in Bremen, the first Type IA was launched on 14 February 1936. In 1940, the boats were called into combat duty due to the shortage of available submarines.Both boats experienced short, but successful combat careers. U-25 participated in five war cruises, sinking eight enemy ships. On 3 August 1940, while on a mine laying mission near Norway, U-25 struck a mine and sank with all hands on board. U-26 carried out eight war cruises, sinking three merchant ships and damaging one British warship on its first mission laying mines. On its second war cruise it became the first U-boat during World War II to enter the Mediterranean Sea. On its eighth war cruise the boat sunk three merchant ships and damaged another ship the next day. The attack on this ship led to severe depth-charging by two British warships, including HMS Gladiolus. Unable to dive, U-26 was forced to surface where she was bombed by a Sunderland flying boat. The crew scuttled the submarine and were rescued by Allied warships. Notes: Beginning of WWII submarines (not counting tier IV) In World of Warships: In comparison to previous tier, Type I has more torpedoes with better damage, hit points and surface speed. However, she has worse speed, while submerged, worse concealment and maneuverability. Type I Tier VII Type VII A Displacement: -surfaced: 626 t -submerged: 745 t Length: 64.51 m Beam: 5.85 m Draught: 4.37 m Speed: -surfaced: 17 knots -submerged: 8 knots Secondary armament: 1×1 8.8 cm (3.46 in) deck gun Torpedoes: -bow: 4x1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes -stern: 1x1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: 1x20mm C/30 Quick history: These boats, designed in 1933-1934, were the first of a new generation of German attack U-boats known, as Type VII, they were popular with their crews and very agile on the surface. They also had a much more powerful striking power than the smaller Type II's. They had 5 torpedo tubes (4 at the bow) and would carry 11 torpedoes onboard or 22 TMA (=33 TMB) mines. They also had the effective 88mm fast-firing deck gun with about 160 rounds of ammunition. Notes: Maybe she could have 2 hulls- Type VII A and Type VII B? For now, she has only one- Type VIIA. In World of Warships: Even though Type VII A has one torpedo tube less, she has better DMP, thanks to faster reload. She also has better concealment. Her speed is slightly lower, but she has much better maneuverability than Type I and more air. Type VIIA Tier VIII Type VII C Displacement: -surfaced: 769 t (Type VIIC) 999 t (Type VIIC/42) 769 t (U-Flak) -submerged: 871 t (Type VIIC) 1099 t (Type VIIC/42) 871 t (U-Flak) Length: 67,2 m (Type VIIC) 68,7 m (Type VIIC/42) 67,2 m (U-Flak) Beam: 6.20 m (Type VIIC) 6,85 m (Type VIIC/42) 6.20 m (U-Flak) Draught: 4.74 m(Type VIIC) 5 m (Type VIIC/42) 4.74 m(U-Flak) Speed: -surfaced: 17.7 knots (Type VIIC) 18,6 knots (Type VIIC/42) 17.7 knots (U-Flak) -submerged: 7.6 knots (Type VIIC) 7,6 knots (Type VIIC/42) 7.2 knots (U-Flak) Secondary armament: 8.8 cm SK L/30 naval gun (Type VIIC) none (Type VIIC/42) 8.8 cm SK L/30 naval gun (U-Flak) Torpedoes: -bow: 4x1 45 cm (17.7 in) (all hulls) -stern: 1x1 45 cm (17.7 in) (all hulls) AA defence: Short range: 1x1 20mm C/30 (Type VIIC) 1x4, 2x2 20mm (Type VIIC/42) 2x4 20mm Flakvierling 38 (U-Flak) Medium range: 1x1 37mm canon Flak M42 (U-Flak) Quick history: The VIIC was the workhorse of the German U-boat force in World War Two from 1941 onwards and boats of this type were being built throughout the war. The first VIIC boat being commissioned was the U-69 in 1940. The VIIC was an effective fighting machine and was seen in almost all areas where the U-boat force operated although their range was not as great as the one of the larger IX types. Notes: The Type VIIC/42 was designed in 1942 and 1943 to replace the aging Type VIIC. It would have had a much stronger pressure hull, with skin thickness up to 28 mm, and would have dived twice as deep as the previous VIICs. These boats would have been very similar in external appearance to the VIIC/41 but with two periscopes in the tower and would have carried two more torpedoes. Contracts were signed for 164 boats and a few boats were laid down, but all were cancelled on 30 September 1943 in favor of the new Type XXI, and none was advanced enough in construction to be launched. U-Flak Four VIIC boats were modified for use as surface escorts for U-boats departing and returning to French Atlantic bases. These "U-Flak" boats were U-441, U-256, U-621, and U-953. Conversion began on three others (U-211, U-263, and U-271) but none was completed and they were eventually returned to duty as standard VIIC attack boats. In World of Warships: There would be 3 hulls- Type VII C - stock hull - Type VIIC/42 -better surface speed, more hit points but no secondary gun (compare to VIIC) - "U-Flak"- more hit points (but slightly less than Type VII/42) - better AA defence - Defensive AA fire consumable-> more survivable against CVs - slightly worse speed, while underwater All 3 hulls would have faster reload, slightly worse concealment and more air in comparison to Type VIIA. I like, when players can choose their style of play. Type VIIC Tier IX Type IX Displacement: -surfaced: 1,032 t (Type IXA) 1,120 t (Type IXC) 1,610 t (Type IXD2) -submerged: 1,153 t (Type IXA) 1,232 t (Type IXC) 1,799 t (Type IXD2) Length: 76.50 m (Type IXA) 76.50 m (Type IXC) 87.58 m (Type IXD2) Beam: 6.51 m (Type IXA) 6.76 m (Type IXC) 7.50 m (Type IXD2) Draught: 4.70 m (Type IXA) 4.70 m (Type IXC) 5.35 m (Type IXD2) Speed: -surfaced: 18.2 knots (Type IXA) 18.2 knots (Type IXC) 20.8 knots (Type IXD2) -submerged: 7.3 knots (Type IXA) 7.3 knots (Type IXC) 6.9 knots (Type IXD2) Secondary armament: 1 × 10.5 cm (4.1 in) SK C/32 deck gun (all hulls) Torpedoes: -bow: 4x1 53.3 cm (21 in) (all hulls) -stern: 2x1 53.3 cm (21 in) (all hulls) AA defence: Short range: 1x2 20mm FlaK 30 AA guns (Type IXA) 1x2 20mm FlaK 30 AA guns (Type IXC) 1x1 20mm FlaK 30 AA gun (Type IXD2) Medium range: 1×1 37mm (1.5 in) SK C/30 AA gun (all hulls) Quick history: The Type IX U-boat was designed by Nazi Germany's Kriegsmarine in 1935 and 1936 as a large ocean-going submarine for sustained operations far from the home support facilities. Type IX boats were briefly used for patrols off the eastern United States in an attempt to disrupt the stream of troops and supplies bound for Europe. It was derived from the Type IA, and appeared in various sub-types. Notes: Type IXD was significantly longer and heavier than the IXC/40. It was faster than the IXC but at the cost of slightly reduced range. There were three variants: the IXD1, IXD2 and IXD/42. Also- Tier IX is Type IX :) In World of Warships: In comparison to previous tier, Type IX has more torpedoes, better AA (but worse than U-Flak hull), more hit points, air, better secondary armament, worse concealment, worse maneuverability. There are 3 hulls: Type IXA- stock hull Type IXC- more hit points, faster reload for torpedoes, slightly more air Type IXD2-more hit points -slightly faster reload (but little bit worse than TypeIXC) -worse maneuverability and concealment (compare to both hulls) -faster on surface, slower while submerged Type IX Tier X Type XXI Displacement: -surfaced: 1,621 t -submerged: 1,819 t Length: 76.70 m Beam: 8 m Draught: 6.32 m Speed: -surfaced: 15.6 knots -submerged: 17.2 knots Secondary armament: none Torpedoes: -bow: 6×1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: 2x2 20 mm C/30 anti-aircraft guns Quick history: They were the first submarines designed to operate primarily submerged, rather than spending most of their time as surface ships that could submerge for brief periods as a means to escape detection. They incorporated a large number of batteries to increase the time they could spend under water, to as much as several days, and they only needed to surface to periscope depth for recharging via a snorkel. The design included many general improvements as well: much greater underwater speed by an improved hull design, greatly improved diving times, power-assisted torpedo reloading and greatly improved crew accommodations. Notes: The pinnacle of German engineering. In World of Warships: In comparison to previous tier, Type XXI has massive forward fire power (but no secondary armament), better concealment than Type IXD2, little bit more hit points (in comparison to Type IXD2), more hit points than Type IXA and Type IXC. She also has better maneuverability and more air (slightly), but most importantly - she has much better speed, while submerged. Type XXI Alternative branch If you want more agressive style gameplay. Characteristics of this alternative branch: -less hit points -less fire power and AA -much better concealment -less air, but with faster replenishment -fast torpedo reload -fast speed, while submerged Tier IX Type XXIII Displacement: -surfaced: 234 t -submerged: 258 t Length: 34.68 m Beam: 3.02 m Draught: 3.66 m Speed: -surfaced: 9.7 knots -submerged: 12.5 knots Secondary armament: none Torpedoes: -bow: 2×1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: none Quick history: When development began on the Type XXI U-boat in late 1942, it was proposed to simultaneously develop a smaller version incorporating the same advanced technology to replace the Type II coastal submarine. The Type XXIII had an all-welded single hull, the first submarine to use such a design. As with the Type XXI, the Type XXIII was intended to be constructed in sections, various modules being produced by different subcontractors. Of the 280 submarines ordered, only 61 entered service, and only 6 ever carried out a war patrol. Notes: In game, speed on surface would be higher. Maybe she could have freezing torpedoes (if you don't know, what it is, look at the Halloween event in 2018)? In World of Warships: In comparison to tier IX counterpart- Type IX: Type XXIII has worse speed on surface and better speed when submerged and much better maneuverability. Type XXIII has no AA or secondary armament. Type IX has more air, that replenises more slowly. Type XXIII has better concealment. Type IX has much more torpedoes, but they reload slower. Type XXIII Tier X Type XVII B Displacement: -surfaced: 312 t -submerged: 337 t Length: 41.45 m Beam: 4.50 m Draught: 4.30 m Speed: -surfaced: 8.8 knots -submerged: 5 knots (electric drive) 25 knots (HTP drive) Secondary armament: none Torpedoes: -bow: 2x1 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: none Quick history: The Type XVII U-boats were small coastal submarines that used a high-test peroxide propulsion system, which offered a combination of air-independent propulsion and high submerged speeds. The Type XVIIA submarines were found to be very hard to handle at high speed, and were plagued by numerous mechanical problems, low efficiency, and the fact that a significant amount of power was lost due to increased back pressure on the exhaust at depth. Also, the length to beam ratio was too low, resulting in an unnecessarily high drag. All three completed Type XVIIB boats were scuttled by their crews at the end of World War II. Notes: Type XVII B shouldn't have permanent speed of 25 knots, while under water. It would be hard to kill her. In World of Warships: Same armament as Type XIII, but with slightly faster reload and slightly more air. Big difference is speed. She can have speed up to 25 knots (HTP drive), while submerged. This is little bit too much, so I think I have a solution. This speed could be achived only, if "HTP drive" consumable would be active. This consumable has infinite charges, but has cooldown of 60 seconds (+-, I can't say if it is too long or short...) and it would be active for 30 seconds (again, don't know if it is too much or too short...). Type XVII Premium: Tier V Type U 151 Displacement: -surfaced: 1,512 tones -submerged: 1,875 tones Length: 65.00 m Beam: 8.90 m Draught: 5.30 m Speed: -surfaced: 12.4 knots -submerged: 5.2 knots Secondary armament: 2x1 150 mm (5.9 in) SK L/45 deck guns Torpedoes: -bow: 2x1 50 cm (20 in) bow torpedo tubes AA defence: Short range: none Quick history: Type U 151 U-boats were a class of large, long-range submarines initially constructed during World War I to be merchant submarines and later used by the Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial German Navy). They had a cruising range of around 25,000 nautical miles (46,000 km; 29,000 mi). Notes: This wouldn't be the only premium submarine. Germany has many special submarines. In World of Warships: This submarine rely more on her secondary armament. Every other submarine has secondary armamenr more as last solution, rather then a weapon. She has more hit points, worse concealment, worse maneuverability than her tier V counterpart. Type U 151 Summary: This tech tree has can be divided into: -starting submarines for begginers -proper (and bigger) ocean submarines- Type VII -high tier submarines- big ocean submarines and agressive submarines General characteristics of this tech tree: -good mix of maneuverability, speed, hit points (exept fo alternative branch) and torpedo armament -submarines would have less hit points that destroyers-> the least hit points from game (exept for Type U 5151). However, thanks to small size and good concealment and mainly to ability to be submerged, they aren't that easy to kill. Usually, I want to compare my fan-made tech tree to other branches, but here it is impossible. If submarines would be implemented in WoWs, there would be a lot of changes: -captain skill -new anti-submarine warfare -new styles of gameplay -rework of maps One thing is certain, if we will see submarines in WoWs or not, that will reveil only the time. If I could choose only 1 submarine, that I want to play, than it would be Type VIIC - classic German submarine, robust, efficient, time-tested... German Tech tree- Submarines I will be glad if you leave your comment below. I hope you enjoyed this article and have a nice day. I apologize for any grammar mistakes, english is not my native language. Sources of information: Books: Encyklopedie válečných lodí- Naše vojsko Německé válečné ponorky 1939-1945 Websites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_XVII_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_XXI_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_XXIII_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_VII_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_II_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_IX_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Type_U 66_submarine
  18. The CV is about to leave our game.....or rather it should. With the coming changes, CV captains will no longer be captains, they will be squadron commanders and their "ship" will be controlled for them, with consumables and movement traded away to the AI. Thus, I propose, with a heavy heart, that the CV be removed and replaced with the trialled submarines, as they are much more worthy of the term "warship" than the new version of the "Carrier", which may as well be a static airfield on an island. I loved the old carrier play and I would be happy to embrace the new version....if I could switch between hull control and the squadron, but the new FAQ shows that wargaming Is taking a stand on preventing that. Thus, its time to let the old girl go and give her a decent burial. Complete removal and replacement of the CV is now a better option than the gutted "thing" that we are about to be left with. So, lets see some announcements about the new submarines and lets try to move forward - I would rather move in this direction than the disaster that is the new cv rework and making a lot of old style CV captains simply leave the game. We need you to give them a new home and that home is a strong presentation of how WG intends to introduce subs....which are going to be our play style's future.
  19. vojtaruner

    Balancing Submarines

    Hello everybody, in World of Warships has been always discusion about submarines and if it is possible for submarines to be in this game. When video with submarine showed up, the discussion about submarines is here again and more serious. In this video is showed submarine gameplay and shows, that submarines are planned for Halloween event. If you haven't seen this gameplay, here is link to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5Cgzarg0HI Many people think, that this Halloween event could be test for possible submarine implementation in World of Warships. If this is true or not, I leave on yourself. Now the main question is: How could be the submarines balanced outside the Halloween event? There is no doubt, that submarines would change the game. Here are some ideas how submarines could be balanced. Please keep in mind, that these are just ideas. Submarines were slower, when compared to destroyers, cruisers, aircraft carriers or even battleships. Therefor, if submarines would make it into the game, their speed needs to be adjusted properly so they can be usable in game. Adding submarines in game is only possible after the other issues in the current state of game are solved. Submarines: Balancing: 1) Air Submarines, when under water, would have limited amount of air. This air would be consumed over time. When out of air, submarine will take damage over time. Submarine's captain would be forced to go to the surface, where air will be refilled. This simpe way submarines would be forced to plan their attack carefully and will prevent submarines from staying under water for too much time. Historically, german engineers experimented with refillyling air, while under water. The submarine had pipe which was lift up, when submarine was few meter under surface. This could be implemented in game for some submarines. It could worked two ways: 1) The submarine doesn't need to be on surface to refill air. 2) Submarine's air consumption would be decreased. One way or another, using this pipe would increase submarine's decection radius. Submarines could have 1 consumable- emergency blow. This would rapidly decrease time needed for emergence. 2) Batteries This is similiar to air solution. Submarines of World War 1 and 2 had diesel engines for propulsion on surface. While operating under water, submarines used electric engines. Electric engines didn't require air and didn't produce fuel gases. However, they required large amount of batteries to keep them running. In WoWs submarines, while under water, will consume electricity. If the batteries are depleted, submarine will stop moving, but emerge. On surface, batteries begin to recharge. There could be also more accurate electric consume system. In this 2nd version, electricity would be consumed only if the submarine is moving submerged. With highter speed comes highter electricity consumtion and so on. This will mean, that submarine could be under water for really long time (if air idea is skipped), but she can't move, making it easy prey to destroyers. Personally, I would prefer the 1st version. 3) No divisions with 2 submarines Fighting in cruiser (for example) with two submarines alone will be very stressful and not enjoyable. Banning divisions with 2 submarines would prevent this to happen. The same step was inplemented for aircraft carriers. 4) Limited amount of torpedoes Honestly, I think that this would be bad way to balance submarines. For example Type VII C/42 submarine had 16 torpedoes. This is quite a lot of torpedoes for submarine of that time. However, in WoWs would be ammunition depleted quickly, leaving submarine only with low caliber gun, or not even that-> being quite useless. 5) Low health pool and non-existing armour This is obvious. Submarine in WoWs can't have more health even than destroyer of the same tier. They are fragile stealth assasins. 6) Modules While on surface, submarine's modules (engines, water/ air tanks or torpedo tubes) could be damaged from enemy shells. If engine is damaged, then the submarine will stop moving, but can dive. If water tanks are damaged, then the submarine can't go under water and if it's submered, it will emerge. If air tanks are damaged, then submarine can't submered and if it's under water, it will emerge. If torpedo tubes are damaged, then submarine can't launch torpedoes. 7) Firing torpedoes at certain depth This idea is for battle between 2 submarines. It would be hard to hit enemy submarine while under water and constantly changing depth and doing evasive manouvers. If this would be implemented in game, submarines could fire torpedoes only in periscopic depth or on surface. The other option is to make restrict depths (for example surface, -10m, -20m, ....), where submarine could operate, while under water (just like in the video from Wargaming). Equipment: Submarines would have passive sonar. Thanks to passive sonar, submarine would be able to hear/ detect enemy ships at short range, while under water. Under water, submarine wouldn't be able to spot enemy ships without sonar. On the surface, submarine would have increased detection radius, but could spot other ships, just like any other ship in WoWs. While in periscopic depth, submarine's concealment would be: -worse, than submarine when under water -better, than submarine when on surface Type VII A, german U-boat Balancing other ships: Destroyers: 1) Depth charges Destroyers would be armed with depth charges. Destroyer would sail above submerged submarine and use sonar (to find out, what is the submarine's depth) and use depth charges to destroy her. 2) Active sonar This would be consumable, which increases detection. This way, submarine would be easier to detect, while under water. However, this consumable would be active only for 40-50 seconds. 3) Passive sonar This would be destroyers passive ability. It enables to detect submerged submarine. It has smaller detection radious than active sonar. Destroyers would be the main anti-submarine force. With hight speed and maneuverability, destroyers would evade attacks and with sonar and depth charges, destroyer would destroy submarine. Cruisers: 1) Active sonar This would be consumable, which increases detection. This way, submarine would be easier to detect, while under water. However, this consumable would be active only for 40-50 seconds. Cruisers would have slightly better sonars than destroyers. 2) Passive sonar This would be cruiser's passive ability. It enables to detect submerged submarine. It has smaller detection radious than active sonar. Cruisers would have slightly better sonars than destroyers. 3) Shells could pierce limited amout of water Shells of cruisers with large caliber guns, would be able to pierce limited amount of water. This way cruiser could damage submarine in periscopic depth. 4) Spotting plane Spotting plane could spot incoming torpedoes or submarine. Spotting plane could be armed with light bombs or depth charges. Cruisers could evade torpedoes, thanks to sonar, and hunt for submarine, until she comes to surface and destroy her. Battleships: 1) Shells could pierce limited amout of water Shells of battleships with large caliber guns, would be able to pierce limited amount of water. This way battleship could damage submarine in periscopic depth. 2) Spotting plane Spotting plane could spot incoming torpedoes or submarine. Spotting plane could be armed with light bombs or depth charges. Battleships would have better spotting planes than cruisers. If submarines were implemented in WoWs, battleships would probably suffer the most. These are 2 ideas to helped them survived. I can't think of any other ideas for battleships, so if you know, you can write them in comments. Aircraft carriers: 1) Planes with depth charges This is quite simple solution. Planes would be armed with depth charges. Group of these planes would search for submarine and sink it with depth charges. Planes are effective way to hunt submarines. However, in WoWs aircraft carrier's captain can get distracted from other tasks and forget about submarine or forget to check his surroundings and get sunk. HMS Ceylon, depth charge explosion What submarines I am looking forward to: Type VII C/42 - classic german U-boat Type XXI - the most advanced U-boat in WW2 Type XXIII- great coastal german submarine I-400- giant submarine, armed with torpedoes and planes Gato-class submarine Last few words: I would love to see submarines in WoWs, but I also don't want to destroy this game. If Wargaming wants to implement submarines in Random battles, then they need to do it carefully. Also, I think that minelayer submarines won't make it into the game. I will be glad if you leave your comment below. I hope you enjoyed this article and have a nice day. I apologize for any grammar mistakes, english is not my native language. I-400, the biggest submarine in the world until nuclear submarines appeared Resourses: Informations: Book- Německé válečné ponorky 1939-1945- Svojtka a Co. Pictures: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400-class_submarine wikiwand.com/fr/Unterseeboot_36_(1936)
  20. Tuccy

    Terror of the Deep

    until
    Operation "Terror of the Deep" will be available as Operation of the Week from October 31 till November 8. Before this date, the operation will be unavailable. Afterwards, this operation will only be available to Divisions until the end of Update 0.7.10. Operation "Terror of the Deep (Hard difficulty)" will be available as Operation of the Week from November 8 till November 22. Before this date, the operation will be unavailable. Afterwards, this operation will only be available to Divisions until the end of Update 0.7.10. For more information consult the Portal article!
  21. with the implication that one day subs may come to pvp i came across a question on an ifhe barracuda sec build: while hovering around -5m the secondaries start to shoot while, indicated by torp accuracy, ship still counts as submerged. bots can't deal with it very well hehe, but question to me is @MrConway: is it intended that on can do such kind of stealthfiring with subs sec guns? (guess not?) on another note: what u guys think in general of such a playstyle for submarines? does the idea of dakkadakka subs appeal, scare or disgust? post #6:
  22. The game has expanded a lot since 2015. New ship lines, mechanics, consumables, etc has been implemented. Now cv-rework is getting near and possibly submarines. Some major changes are needed to have these lines implemented into the game. New consumables will be added, old will be changed, some captain skills will be changed, ships will have new roles added to the old ones. At the same time there are mechanics that aren't working as intended atm, bb AP on dds for example, another pet peeve of mine is the heavy cruiser on light cruiser match up that in theory should favour the heavy, but that's very situational. Even if I understand that a complete overhaul of the game is out of the question, I'm wondering if it's not the time to take a step back and look over the game and its concepts now that 2 'new' lines potentially can be released in the game? Should the old lines have their old roles? I think the game is good at the moment. I also think that introducing new aspects/ships/concepts to the game has increased the complexity and that the balance and roles of ships could be looked over and maybe improved upon, maybe now when there's a need for some rebalance regardless. Not just looking at stats how various ships perform but more from a conceptual perspective. For example - At close range a bb or a heavy cruiser should, imo, annihilate a broadsiding cruiser. Often you get plenty of overpens through the citadel. It's a mechanic in the game, but is it intuitive and good? (I know some of you think it is, because it's in the game). Or radars - should it penetrate islands? Maybe it should because the game is more fun that way, but maybe, with the possible introduction of subs, the game would improve from less radar spotting? DDs role could gravitate more toward counter subs and could perhaps be able to move in island areas more safely than now. The game is getting more complicated, it's getting more inaccessible for newcomers due to this. The majority of the players will never learn from tips or tutorials but play the game from what seems reasonable in their minds. The game shouldn't be dumbed down but the game and the mechanics needs to be intuitive. What's your take?
×