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

Submarines: the next step.

327 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,650 posts
12,268 battles
1 minute ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

You know what I mean, mano a mano mode, no fancy up in the sky or down in the depths.

 

I knew what you meant, mate. WoWS works well as an "X/Y axis" game. Every attempt by WG to introduce a Z axis component has failed hard. This will be no different.

 

Either subs will be totally unrealistic and OP as phuq or they will be realistic and weak as hell and consequently unappealing to all (especially those people who think they want them in game).

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
10,784 posts
16,198 battles
21 minutes ago, xxNihilanxx said:

Jesus, a guy on a pedalo armed with a catapult would have been highly efficient at the job, that's why subs preferred to pick on unarmed merchant ships.

 

Inb4 BBs get a catapult ASW plane consumable that automatically detects and attacks subs within 20km. :Smile_sceptic:

 

Can't have the masterrace be weak to something after all.

  • Funny 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
670 posts
13,441 battles

Exactly what @xxNihilanxx said, subs spent 70% of their time attacking merchant convoys, other 30% they spent sinking. I don't see the appeal in subs unless they buff them considerable, making them something they are not. And where's the joy and fun in that?

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,198 posts
6,520 battles

Pitchforks get your pitchforks right here, get them while theyr hot, special prices roight here! 

Buy one get a torch for free! 

:Smile_trollface:

 

 

On a more serious note, guess this means we get depthcharges, now, will these cause damage to also ships or just the subs :cap_yes:

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
153 posts
9,724 battles
10 minutes ago, Major_Damage225 said:

On a more serious note, guess this means we get depthcharges, now, will these cause damage to also ships or just the subs :cap_yes:

I wouldn't be surprised if wg expects us to shoot them out of the water... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
1,290 posts

While I don't mind subs in principle, we all know WG is going to fvck it all up.

They've barely managed to balance CV rework, and they're already taking on the next mission impossible.

 

How on earth do they think they're going to balance a completely new class? They will have to rebalance each and every single ship already in the game to help it cope with subs (depthcharges or whatever), while at the same time making subs viable either through lightning fast speed, DD in smoke detection range or Kitakami-esque torp strength :cap_fainting:

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NOCAP]
Beta Tester
14 posts
10,367 battles

I wonder if deep water torps will work on them at periscope depth. :cap_yes:

 

Minor buff for Pan Asian and some premium DDs then. :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,650 posts
12,268 battles
15 minutes ago, Major_Damage225 said:

Pitchforks get your pitchforks right here, get them while theyr hot, special prices roight here! 

Buy one get a torch for free! 

:Smile_trollface:

 

 

On a more serious note, guess this means we get depthcharges, now, will these cause damage to also ships or just the subs :cap_yes:

 

Oi! Watch it, geezer, you're encroaching on my patch!!!

 

On 7/5/2019 at 7:19 PM, xxNihilanxx said:

Of course the downside to WG changing their minds about this (and there's always a downside) is that I had a job lot of cheap torches and pitchforks shipped over from China that I was hoping to sell at a profit to the enraged community.

 

What the phuq am I going to do with them all now? Got a back bedroom full of the things, my better half is going ballistic.

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
267 posts
5,613 battles

I predict a steaming, splattered high-velocity turd-into-fan saga of biblically epic proportions - the kind of spinning-bow-tie extravaganza that will make the CV rework look like a minor UI tweak by comparison. WG have shown they can't balance anything that is above the water - what weapons-grade muppet came up with the idea that they can balance things below it? 

 

They haven't even fixed the CVs yet - we're six/seven months in and it's still unsatisfactory for all parties concerned. You don't fix things by throwing progressively more spanners into the works.

 

CV Rework. Naval Training Centre. Loot Boxes for Early Access Ships. I need to find the person behind these ideas …. I have some magic beans, a bucket of steam and some tartan paint to sell them...

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,258 posts
2,939 battles

inb4 WG's mandatory "Please wait until you have tested it to judge"

 

Also, as an outsider, I'll stock up on popcorn. The next months are gonna be hectic~

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
267 posts
5,613 battles
Just now, LastButterfly said:

inb4 WG's mandatory "Please wait until you have tested it to judge"

Yeah, like THAT worked really well with the rework - closed beta testing , open beta testing plus the half a year of 'live server testing' we've all come to know and love...

 

:cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,650 posts
12,268 battles
9 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

CV Rework. Naval Training Centre. Loot Boxes for Early Access Ships. I need to find the person behind these ideas …. I have some magic beans, a bucket of steam and some tartan paint to sell them...

 

That's if they have any funds left once they've paid for the delightful, beach-front property in Birmingham that I have on offer.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,258 posts
2,939 battles
3 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

Yeah, like THAT worked really well with the rework - closed beta testing , open beta testing plus the half a year of 'live server testing' we've all come to know and love...

 

Don't be sarcastic like that. It DID work. After all, Wg said it at every backlash save for like one or two, and every single time, they ended up implementing what was criticized, which was then further criticized but they went "lol it's already ig now".

And after doing that a dozen of times, or god knows how many more... players are still here.

So, yes. It did work really well for Wg every single time. No reason they should stop using this method !

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,650 posts
12,268 battles
3 minutes ago, LastButterfly said:

 

Don't be sarcastic like that. It DID work. After all, Wg said it at every backlash save for like one or two, and every single time, they ended up implementing what was criticized, which was then further criticized but they went "lol it's already ig now".

And after doing that a dozen of times, or god knows how many more... players are still here.

So, yes. It did work really well for Wg every single time. No reason they should stop using this method !

 

Except that anyone who knows how to read between the lines understands that, as a result of most of these decisions, their revenues are dropping faster than a Barnsley girl's knickers. This is why we are seeing SO MANY desperate moves by WG to try to increase revenue.

 

They said right from the start that they would never introduce subs and gave multiple reasons as to why. So why is it, do you think, that they have suddenly changed their mind? Running out of ways to get cash from those players who still pay, perhaps???

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Weekend Tester
694 posts

Submarines are kind of opposite to carriers in that whereas carriers completely dominated any surface combat ships, submarines weren't much use in typical naval combat until homing torp... oh ship.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BODEM]
Players
458 posts
5,346 battles

I'm not going to like this. I thought Subs were boring in the event. I don't want them in the main game. No, thank you. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,258 posts
2,939 battles
8 minutes ago, xxNihilanxx said:

Except that anyone who knows how to read between the lines understands that, as a result of most of these decisions, their revenues are dropping faster than a Barnsley girl's knickers. This is why we are seeing SO MANY desperate moves by WG to try to increase revenue.

 

Naaah, if the situation was critical, they wouldn't continue to behave the exact same way as they always have. I mean, I haven't followed their revenue (it's not my problem, like I care) but...

 

8 minutes ago, xxNihilanxx said:

They said right from the start that they would never introduce subs and gave multiple reasons as to why. So why is it, do you think, that they have suddenly changed their mind? Running out of ways to get cash from those players who still pay, perhaps???

 

... instead of running out of ways to get cash, they try to find even more ways to get cash. They're gonna milk the thing dry sooner or later, y'have my word. They do more and more extravagant and absurd decisions to test the player's limit.

And so far it has not been found as far as I know. The p(l)ayers keep eating whatever **** WG feeds them~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
684 posts
5,167 battles

Excellent! Limit the subs area of operation to the borders and they will feast on the tears of border licking fools.

Perfect. Good one WG.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,650 posts
12,268 battles
1 hour ago, LastButterfly said:

 

Naaah, if the situation was critical, they wouldn't continue to behave the exact same way as they always have.

 

I never said it was "critical" but it's heading in that direction and you have a lot more faith in WG than any sane person if you truly believe this. They are like the spouse that keeps going back to their abusive partner because they just cannot see any other course of action. The way WG see things is that if they try something and it doesn't work they just need to try it more and harder. They can't conceive of the fact that they are wrong. Typical human behaviour and, let's face it, the devs are only typical humans.

 

Quote

 

... instead of running out of ways to get cash, they try to find even more ways to get cash. They're gonna milk the thing dry sooner or later, y'have my word. They do more and more extravagant and absurd decisions to test the player's limit.

And so far it has not been found as far as I know. The p(l)ayers keep eating whatever **** WG feeds them~

 

I have talked to quite a lot of people about this and the number of people who still play this game but stopped giving WG any money whatsoever as a result of their poor design decisions is staggering. Sure we still play the game because there really isn't a viable alternative but we stopped giving them the huge sums of money that we used to - that's not really what you could call "eating whatever **** WG feeds" us.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
617 posts
14,813 battles
1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Inb4 BBs get a catapult ASW plane consumable that automatically detects and attacks subs within 20km. :Smile_sceptic:

 

Can't have the masterrace be weak to something after all.

 

I can't believe I'm going to defend the BB players... but the HMS Warspite did use its spotter plane to successfully sink the submarine U64.

 

So the BB players perhaps should have a special instant kill option for when dealing with subs after all we wouldn't want to inconvenience them. 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Weekend Tester
694 posts

It's going to be interesting to see how WG actually attempt to implement submarines into the game. They are going to have to buff some characteristics massively to make them relevant in any way. Let's take a look at the actual characteristics of a Type VIIC U-boat - probably a mid to mid-high tier ship in the game:

 

  • Mass: 769 tonnes (about 1/3 to 1/4 of a DD -> should translate to extremely low hp pool)
  • Speed: 17.7knots surfaced, 7.6 submerged (if they double the surface speed it's still not a fast ship and if submerged speed is tripled, it's still probably the slowest boat in the tiers).
  • Weapons: typically 4 torps forward, 1 aft, some ships had less (and these are smaller torps with less damage and range than typical DD torps, more akin to aerial weapons), 1 88mm dual purpose secondary gun
  • AA: every crewmember must attend meetings after a combat patrol
  • concealment: god-tier, especially when submerged below periscope depth

How do you turn this into something fun while still trying to maintain some kind of resemblance to the original thing?

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
3,280 posts
8,363 battles
49 minutes ago, Bellegar said:

we all know WG is going to fvck it all up.

We do. If I were WG, I'd be rather concerned about this - it can't be good for them to have this level of cynicism and general distrust amongst the more active elements of the customer base.

 

Of course, we could be even more wildly unrepresentative of the wider customer base than usual I suppose...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Weekend Tester
694 posts

...and once you manage to make submarines fun, the real challenge begins. Silent Hunter and other submarine games are a lot of fun (as long as you have time compression), it's actually quite entertaining to try to ambush convoys and so on. However, hunting submarines has only ever been interesting in some pretty hard core games that model complicated modern equipment to the level that makes using them interesting. Otherwise it's just a mix of boring and frustrating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
617 posts
14,813 battles
3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

We do. If I were WG, I'd be rather concerned about this - it can't be good for them to have this level of cynicism and general distrust amongst the more active elements of the customer base.

 

Of course, we could be even more wildly unrepresentative of the wider customer base than usual I suppose...

 

That is part of the problem we are very cynical and conservative as a community, remember how almost everyone lost their minds about the introduction of RPF, and then WG went ahead anyway and proved it wasn't the death of DD gameplay.

 

I think that was the cause their arrogance of pushing ahead with the carrier rework they just though it was us over reacting, hopefully this time they will be a lot more careful. 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
158 posts
3,896 battles

Can't say I am looking forward to this new mode, reading all the carefully worded replies above, most of it giving much more carefully worded criticism than I could do, just fills me with doubt.

 

I think it will happen whether we like it or not, I just hope they keep it to a separate game mode, which you can opt out of.  

 

Regards  SKWK :Smile_amazed: 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×