Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
FooFaFie

I'm a submarine...you're a submarine...we're submarines

215 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
62 posts
2,436 battles
3 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

BTW this video has an explanation, looks to me like it is one of the devs.

[snip]

 

Good find, quite explanatory.

Oh, depth charges. Nice! No Jürgen Prochnow as captain though? Awww... :Smile_Default:

Btw, you know what this means if we are to get Submarines in the game? Battlecruisers will be next! Smile_trollface.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
3,643 posts
3,851 battles
2 minutes ago, Caurinus said:

Good find, quite explanatory.

Oh, depth charges. Nice! No Jürgen Prochnow as captain though? Awww... :Smile_Default:

Btw, you know what this means if we are to get Submarines in the game? Battlecruisers will be next! Smile_trollface.gif

We already have them, just they aren't called that. I have the Hood. Some German ships are available as well. 

I like Hood, cruisers are OK for me as well and I do Ok in the USA gunboat DDs. Mainly I like BBs.

Just seems some of them do not like ME. I'll find out how to play them though...

 

Depth charges are not the only things. Torpedos and surface guns will work too, just not when subs are deeper down.

And I guess hydro will work on them too, but radar will not unless they are at the surface. 

 

A good thing would be to have bigger maps, with some more objectives than 'capping a point' or just kill everything.

Far more like operations are now - escorting ships, defending a harbour, whatever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HALON]
Players
598 posts
8,992 battles
1 hour ago, Historynerd said:

Too bad, now everything's that left is hope that they don't annihilate the game for this.

 

Ironically, the presence of submarines would give lots of material for an Italian line, as the Regia Marina and the Italian shipyards were very active in that area; in 1940 the Italian submarine fleet was numerically the second in the world (after the Soviet navy, surprisingly).

 

Please, WG just said they want to introduce subs because they are running out of real ships to put in the game. Italian navy just does not exists for them. 

 

We’ll have T10 soviets subs for sure, but don’t hold you breath for Italian submarines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
62 posts
2,436 battles
3 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

We already have them, just they aren't called that. I have the Hood. Some German ships are available as well. 

 

Yeah, I know that, I should have clarified that I meant Battlecruisers as a separate class... my poor attempt at being facetious. :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
3,643 posts
3,851 battles
Just now, Caurinus said:

Yeah, I know that, I should have clarified that I meant Battlecruisers as a separate class... my poor attempt at being facetious. :Smile_facepalm:

I understood that, and also I agree. It will be 'the thing after'. I'd think likely they 'invent' minefields first though. KA-BOOM!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GBONA]
Players
46 posts
14,645 battles

This just in: In order for WG to balans... the subs, Radar will also work underwater!

 

Cause why not... if it can penetrate rock!!!

 

WG fix the bloody radars first then introduce rubber duckies or whatever!

 

deep-throat_o_1224165_1000_661_s_c1.thumb.jpg.5d352583ee4e3be99df2a611cfabaa29.jpg

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,804 posts
9,156 battles
8 minutes ago, Amon_ITA said:

Please, WG just said they want to introduce subs because they are running out of real ships to put in the game. Italian navy just does not exists for them.

Let's say they launch 2 lines a year.  We know about British DDs, Russian BBs, the Pan-European line. They also have Italian BBs, CLs, DDs (x2, large and small), French Destroyers (x2 large and small), RN CVs, CAs, BCs, KM BCs, Japanese CLs and American large DDs. That should take them up 2026, by which time the world will probably have ended, but if it hasn't they've got another seven lines of submarines and accompanying counter-ships (light destroyer escorts with A/S specialisations) to play with. That's before they start doing WW1 and pre-dreadnought stuff properly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HEAT]
[HEAT]
Players
1,135 posts
33,156 battles

After I knew about WOWs, The first thing I asked about is " Does it have Submarines?". If Submarines can find their place in PvP environment then it will be a great addition to the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,776 posts
6,223 battles
4 hours ago, tamagotchi said:

Albeit presenting a bigger target visually, a ships showing her belt was indeed more difficult to hit at range. This is because the guns have large vertical dispersion, so it was easier for the shells to fall short or pass the target distance. On the other hand, horizontal accuracy was easier to achieve thanks to the complex targeting computer and gun training system. Think of shell dispersion area as a vertically oriented ellipse instead of a horizontal one. In this case, a ship showing her belt (thus being horizontal) would have a smaller chance of getting hit due to the reduced cross section between herself and the shell's expected landing area (since they are perpendicular), while a bow-on ship would align perfectly with the dispersion. In this game, the vertical dispersion of the your guns is being buffed when you lock on a target, so you don't see your shell falling short or flying pass the target that often. That being said, I fully understand why the game works like this because it would be counter intuitive as hell when shooting at a target that looks smaller on your screen tends to land more hits while firing at 'big fat target' only result in your shell to fall harmlessly around her.

I am aware of both real dispersion patterns and also how the game has changed them. The reality (out of game )is that it is much more difficult to judge direction and speed when a target is heading towards the shooter than if it was parallel or noticeably angled - the dispersion pattern is not relevant if you cannot shoot close to the target.

The difference being that no optical range finder provides a noticeable change to the target aspect unless the range is relatively short - the greater the horizontal component of it's course relative to the shooter the higher the visibility of its actual direction and speed.

(I had the same thoughts as you have in respect of the pattern, but from discussions with Tony DiGiulian, it might have been Guy (been a while), joint founder of Navweapons, he explained the difference - this was maybe 20 years ago and is one of the things that has stuck in my mind).

 

____________

Anyways, we digress - happy to continue off thread though.

cheers

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CIRC]
Players
2 posts
6,124 battles

Welp let's see how WG implements this, expecting this to take a lot of testing to be acutally balanced properly

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
126 posts
6,729 battles
8 hours ago, Strappster said:

 

Right now I'm more intrigued about the giant sea creature we saw in the video. Is that simply underwater 'flavour' or will it form part of the event?

 

The real question is will it be playable and at what Tier?

 

I can't wait till the day when all the BB players are shouting: SEA MONSTER OP PLEASE NERF! 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POMF]
Beta Tester
1,981 posts
4,030 battles
5 hours ago, tenacious_torps said:

So... SM now means submarine in this game?


Actually the proper usage would be SS

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
695 posts
8,286 battles
13 hours ago, hjsteg said:

Looking forward to this. All ships needs a way to counter the submarine threat. So depth charges for all ships, including BB's? Will be really interesting to see the gameplay in a random battle. Lots of stuff that needs to be worked out. 

 

Nah, DDs only. Some cruisers had depth charges and ASDIC but it was DDs that did the work. BBs are just targets for subs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,634 posts
3,562 battles
30 minutes ago, That_Other_Nid said:

 

Nah, DDs only. Some cruisers had depth charges and ASDIC but it was DDs that did the work. BBs are just targets for subs.

Tell that to HMS Dreadnought.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
850 posts
13,612 battles
12 hours ago, Hades_warrior said:

Something like Nautilus?

EmbarrassedGoldenBantamrooster-size_rest

That's not Nautilus, that's a capsized and sinking hull with the video played backwards. This is a true Nautilus model:

20000+leagues+nautilus+model.jpg

 

6 hours ago, tenacious_torps said:

So... SM now means submarine in this game?

1 hour ago, Verdius said:

Actually the proper usage would be SS

Due to the widespread use of USN hull clasification codes (notice that those are the ones commonly used when communicating within the game and in the forum too), yes, the proper one would be SS.

 

I don't really see the submarines working outside of some events or operations, at least not with what's been shown. But it seems that WG managed to get a very workable basic concept: single torpedoes with independent reload (recycled code, since it can be considered a variation of forward-firing launchers in low tier KM DDs) and relatively long arming distance, and limited time for being submerged. One thing that got me intrigued was the fact that the spread was still adjustable between wide and narrow, which could mean that "full" (only 2 or 3, considering the weapon selection down the GUI) torpedo salvoes might be included at the cost of extra reloading time. The biggest issue i can think of when balancing with the other classes is the speed, wich would be heavily buffed, because even the models shown (I recognise one late-war or post-war USN SS and a Type XXI -this one's pretty gorgeous in its steampunk-esque outfit with the clock at the side of the sail-) were so slow IRL that almost any BB from T4 onwards outruns them.

 

Salute.

 

P.S.: If in the end submarine lines are added to the normal PvP game, I wonder if assigning Ashigara's mental model/captain to one of them would help muffling her voice. Gags are certainly not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
695 posts
8,286 battles
1 hour ago, lafeel said:

Tell that to HMS Dreadnought.

Ramming has to be an option. Probably a good one for the very slow low tier subs before depth charges and hydro.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
2,228 posts
12,857 battles
4 hours ago, lafeel said:

Tell that to HMS Dreadnought.

Ergh... To which razorblade exactly?

 

 

12 hours ago, Caurinus said:

As I mainly play Cruisers and Destroyers I wouldn't mind go sub hunting with sonar and depth charges. Smile_trollface.gif

You do that most of the time after first BB salvo! It's called VHT - Vertical Hunting Technique.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
1,248 posts
16,500 battles
18 hours ago, Hades_warrior said:

We BB (and maybe cruisers) players just got one more thing on the list to hate and blame WG.

Why , u already get a warning you're detected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
90 posts
18 hours ago, VooDooZG_Nervozni_Purger said:

 

Well I hope it will (submarine) -- it would give such a big immersion in game

LOL ! :Smile_Default:

Seriously, now DDs are acting as submarines in game, thanks to their stealth (just fast submarines). If submarines are to be implemented, DD role must be thought again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,673 posts
10,451 battles
11 minutes ago, M4R4Z said:

LOL ! :Smile_Default:

Seriously, now DDs are acting as submarines in game, thanks to their stealth (just fast submarines). If submarines are to be implemented, DD role must be thought again.

 

Nah that would just be your average 20km-Shimakaze-guy.

 

The rest of us is actually playing DDs like super-light-cruisers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
400 posts
11,452 battles

I just want to put my two cents in and say that I don't like this at all.

 

The sad thing is that when I say it people find it amusing to laugh at me and tell me to "STFU".

 

I saw a vote on a FB-Group were 25% said they would leave the game I subs are implemented beyond the Halloween-event. I'm one of them and about 50% of my clan agrees.

 

I'm so sad right now. :-(

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
1,766 posts
20,213 battles

yeah, might get harder to sealclub in fujin and umikaze (which i suspect to boil down the same as subs play):Smile_facepalm:... nothing determined and yet people cry. cv rework on the other hand, lots of reasons to cry lol (like in: total new concept; subs aint new, just a new skin and mechanic for dd's. finally we'll have torp dd's back so to say)...

i rather see subs introduced than cv's reworked in the manner they'll do now, but both (if not really messed up ^^) won't drive me outta here. indeed i'm kinda excited to get my hands on a type XXI... MAYBE lol....

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×