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

Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) - The Balancing Nightmares....

208 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,590 posts
8,006 battles

Oh and no BBs ever had real depth charges as far as I can see. Only ones that imitated enemy shells falling short to put the enemy gunners off.

 

So good luck BBs.lol You are royally buggered.

 

Can't see many subs coming to the surface 3k away to eat a 14inch HE shell in the face.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,590 posts
8,006 battles

Oh and heavy cruisers. So it's gonna be strictly DD and CL job.

 

Again they did have racks, but were never used for depth charges (just flares and signal devices). No depth charges ever set foot on a BB or CA as far as I can see. 

 

Doom.lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
115 posts
592 battles

Well what I can think of each subs having unique traits on each nation.

US.
-Advanced computers to calculate torpedo firing solutions, continued to use the same computers even during the cold war for being very reliable.
-Radar detection equipment
Germans.
-Snorkel, allows a submarine to use diesel engine while at periscope depth and recharge its oxygen. Originally was a Dutch invention
-The first acoustic torpedoes, their range is tho only 5-6km.
-Torpedo autoloader (XXI) Fast reload for the first bunch of torpedoes before going into long reload.
-First electric torpedoes were pretty unreliable with a 40% failure rate required to be heated most times to avoid becoming duds.
Soviets
-Interesting minelaying options
-Great secondaries
-Bane of fishing boats.
IJN
-Fastest Subs, I-201 series. 30km/h surface, 35km/h submerged!
-Excellent torpedo range.
Royal Navy
No clue really.
 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WWGU]
Players
562 posts
10,369 battles
8 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Oh and no BBs ever had real depth charges as far as I can see. Only ones that imitated enemy shells falling short to put the enemy gunners off.

 

So good luck BBs.lol You are royally buggered. 

I can't see this coming to pass. 

I'd expect WG will ensure that BBs have super, main gun delivered, depth charges which home underwater at 45knts!

ie a homing long range torpedo delivered at up to 20km

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
[GURKA]
Players
3,386 posts
7,921 battles
24 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Oh and no BBs ever had real depth charges as far as I can see. Only ones that imitated enemy shells falling short to put the enemy gunners off.

 

So good luck BBs.lol You are royally buggered.

 

Can't see many subs coming to the surface 3k away to eat a 14inch HE shell in the face.

 

16 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Oh and heavy cruisers. So it's gonna be strictly DD and CL job.

 

Again they did have racks, but were never used for depth charges (just flares and signal devices). No depth charges ever set foot on a BB or CA as far as I can see. 

 

Doom.lol

Some BBs have torpedos and Sonar. Beside that, does have BBs fun against not spotted DDs? ;D

Subs have not infinite oxygen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
[GURKA]
Players
3,386 posts
7,921 battles
18 minutes ago, Elektroboot said:

IJN
-Fastest Subs, I-201 series. 30km/h surface, 35km/h submerged!
-Excellent torpedo range.

The unqiue traits would be more those huge submarines. The IJN had the largest (I-400)

Thus I would go as special trait with the 90-120m longer subs of the IJN. Large HP pools, maybe a lot oxygen and planes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WWGU]
Players
562 posts
10,369 battles
17 minutes ago, Elektroboot said:

Royal Navy
No clue really.

A RN Sub was the only one to sink a submerged Submarine with torpedoes. 

That gives a possible unique trait - anti-submarine warfare!

 

Don't forget mini subs for Italian's and the British.

'Chariots' for the Italians, British and Germans...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
115 posts
592 battles
18 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The unqiue traits would be more those huge submarines. The IJN had the largest (I-400)

Thus I would go as special trait with the 90-120m longer subs of the IJN. Large HP pools, maybe a lot oxygen and planes

Sadly it's a strategic submarine and it's way too big and too obvious to be any good against anti-shipment missions or submarine warfare. The hangar had only space for 3 aircraft anyways if you want to give it some gimmick. Submarines had horrible turn radiuses, I can't imagine this thing to turn but submarines in WW2 didn't need to turn shiftly most times since torpedoes had almost 360 firing arc giving the right solution for it since they can just turn around after firing, Even stern torpedoes could make a 180 decree turn to become forward-firing.

I-201 would still be hundred times better than that big behemoth since none submarines could travel that fast underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
[GURKA]
Players
3,386 posts
7,921 battles
6 minutes ago, Elektroboot said:

Sadly it's a strategic submarine and it's way too big and too obvious to be any good against anti-shipment missions or submarine warfare. The hangar had only space for 3 aircraft anyways if you want to give it some gimmick. Submarines had horrible turn radiuses, I can't imagine this thing to turn but submarines in WW2 didn't need to turn shiftly most times since torpedoes had almost 360 firing arc giving the right solution for it since they can just turn around after firing, Even stern torpedoes could make a 180 decree turn to become forward-firing.

I-201 would still be hundred times better than that big behemoth since none submarines could travel that fast underwater.

It's an arcade game, so they would work. The Katori wasn't a combat cruiser either, but still in the game. Also Steel Ocean has all the large subs in their tech tree, so they already working in another game ;)

I really hope, they don't go with the small subs of the IJN. Being large with bad turning circles is their drawbacks. Ships and boats should have disadvantages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,006 posts
6,187 battles
18 hours ago, Zigiran said:

Do you classify the ASW DD as a seperate class?

Because if you treat them as a regular DD... MM will screw you over.

 

Both teams get 2 subs

One team ends up with 3 ASW DD's and 1 normal DD

The other team gets 4 normal DD's and has no hard counter to the enemy subs?

 

Remember, this is WG, who is fully willing to put all the radar cruisers in 1 team and all the non-radar cruisers in the other team.... :Smile_amazed:

I believe all ships will have some sort of ASW. In my opinion the most likely to happen is ASW being automatic, with am ingame system close to AA mechanic. Like AA, you will have ships stronger than others in that regard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WWGU]
Players
562 posts
10,369 battles
39 minutes ago, elblancogringo said:

I believe all ships will have some sort of ASW. In my opinion the most likely to happen is ASW being automatic, with am ingame system close to AA mechanic. Like AA, you will have ships stronger than others in that regard. 

While I expect that this is what will happen, it isn't what should happen. 

ASW should be the preserve of DDs and CLs.

 

This should be part of the reason that BBs and CAs should look to protect them. Instead of the thinking that the reason these classes exist is to be disposable resources for the 'Heavies' to expend. You know to do nothing but to spot and cap so that the 'heavies' can snipe from the back line.

Similarly DDs and CLs should to be a screen for the 'heavies'.

 

Done well, the differentiation of roles should improve teamwork.

 

I can dream... can't I?

Edited by Cambera_1
Clarity
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,223 posts
6,524 battles

One thing that donsent give me peace now, WG stated that no ship will have fixed torp tubes and no subs (and we know what happened to the second one), will WG be so imaginative to add them? 

What do ya'll think? 

What are the chances? 

:cap_yes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,590 posts
8,006 battles

AWS should and will be CL and DD only.

 

One of the biggest messes is that every ship can do anything to anyone.

 

Hence why there is no team support what so ever in random. When will they learn.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
[GURKA]
Players
3,386 posts
7,921 battles
4 minutes ago, Major_Damage225 said:

One thing that donsent give me peace now, WG stated that no ship will have fixed torp tubes and no subs (and we know what happened to the second one), will WG be so imaginative to add them? 

What do ya'll think? 

What are the chances? 

:cap_yes:

 

In Stream or Video they said, they don't want add fixed tubes. And that wasn't that long ago. So, they' won't come for a while at least until they change their opinion. But I would assume, they will never come, would be too much torpedo spam, I guess

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,223 posts
6,524 battles
4 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

In Stream or Video they said, they don't want add fixed tubes. And that wasn't that long ago. So, they' won't come for a while at least until they change their opinion. But I would assume, they will never come, would be too much torpedo spam, I guess

Well tbf, lately everything WG states im taking with a metric tonne of salt, but good to know theyr sayd that thats not coming, as is too many ships send torps from beyond twice theyr range :Smile_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,956 posts
9,684 battles
1 hour ago, Elektroboot said:

Royal Navy
No clue really.

Ten torp broadside? The WW2 T class were slow but hit very hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-R-P]
Players
1,683 posts
15,630 battles

About bigger warships.

 

Bismarck had as I remember few depth charges on board, I'm almost sure that similar system had Musashi as same as some of IJN CVE's - not only as aircraft weapon but placed on racks on stern. From bigger warships like CA/CL's almost all IJN CL's with few CA's like Aoba and Maya after refit had ASW gear also. Most RN CL and CA's had single rack so it's quiet big amount of warships.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
277 posts
5,662 battles
11 minutes ago, Marblehead_1 said:

About bigger warships.

 

Bismarck had as I remember few depth charges on board, I'm almost sure that similar system had Musashi as same as some of IJN CVE's - not only as aircraft weapon but placed on racks on stern. From bigger warships like CA/CL's almost all IJN CL's with few CA's like Aoba and Maya after refit had ASW gear also. Most RN CL and CA's had single rack so it's quiet big amount of warships.

I can't really see the Bismarck chasing down and depth-charging a sub. The main limit to larger ships is their physical size and ponderous mobility - which isn't ideal for chasing and keeping up with the movements of an agile sub. Plus you have the issue that a big target is much easier for said sub to torpedo long before the depth charges can come into play. CL is probably the largest ship that can get away with it.

 

I would hope that the ASW stuff we're going to get will be far more than just depth charges. DDs should at least get the option to have hedgehog or some other stand-off launcher that can allow them to get at subs WITHOUT having to play catch up, then trying to drop stuff on their target. This could surely be 'aimed' like torps currently are rather than a proximity-based DPS system?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC_DK]
Beta Tester
292 posts
3,918 battles

See a lot of brain storming just to come up with ideas to make this balanced....

 

First a bismarck would never try to chase and hit a sub with depth charges. Please stop watching too many movies, it is embarrasing to hear.

What if the sub just sent torps against the slow lumbering giant comming their way.....would be quite easy and hard to avoid getting hit.

No captain worth anything would do silly things like that.

 

Hitting the sub with main guns will not be easy. Firstly they will not go further up than periscope depth and still that would be hard to hit. 

Their stealth range would be stupid short...like 2-3 km max.....good luck spotting them. Imagine night maps.....even harder to see them.

 

Let us imagine that dds is the only class plus some CLs that can hit subs.  2-3 mins into the game the dds are dead from CV attack. 

It is going to be great to sail around in bbs knowning that you can not win the game anymore. If the stupid player in dds or the one or two CL on the team dies. 

100 % loss.

 

It was a ton of fun in halloween mode and will likely work there, maybe a separate game inside the game. But in the normal standard game it seems way to hard

to balance. It is hard enough as it is now. But who knows. WG is desperate to get the last penny from us, no matter destroying the game in the process.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,590 posts
8,006 battles
1 hour ago, Marblehead_1 said:

About bigger warships.

 

Bismarck had as I remember few depth charges on board, I'm almost sure that similar system had Musashi as same as some of IJN CVE's - not only as aircraft weapon but placed on racks on stern. From bigger warships like CA/CL's almost all IJN CL's with few CA's like Aoba and Maya after refit had ASW gear also. Most RN CL and CA's had single rack so it's quiet big amount of warships.

 

Wrong.

 

The Bismarck never had depth charges on their logs. They had the rails but were used for those signal and faulse low hit charges as I've already described. No depth charge ever got on the ship.

 

Only one class of heavy cruiser, the Aboa had them and only after a late refit. 

 

Only RN light crusiers had them, no York or county class (heavy) ever had depth charges, not even the rack. So the Essex at tier 5 wont have them for instance which is the only current heavy RN cruiser.

 

But yeah, all other light cruisers and DDs should have them. Ships like the Des,  Balti, Buff, zao, Hindy, hipper ect wont have them and never did. But ships like the mino (prob), chappy, Colbert ect will.

 

Well saying that Cleveland class never had them, didnt even have the rails. But you Atlanta captain's will be happy, they had lots of depth charges.:cap_tea:

 

Confirmed, the only US cruiser heavy or light to ever have depth charges were the Atlanta class. Sucks to be US with subs I guess now. Even the woster didn't have them or anything to even launch them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
495 posts
11,807 battles

It feels like if that much stuff goes onto DDs, then I'll need a second keyboard to play the game.

 

OP: I have all these worries and then some so IMHO this will never work, at least so I will enjoy it. WG forgot what "K-I-S-S" stands for. ("Keep It Simple, Stupid")

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,590 posts
8,006 battles
24 minutes ago, gizaman said:

 

Let us imagine that dds is the only class plus some CLs that can hit subs.  2-3 mins into the game the dds are dead from CV attack. 

It is going to be great to sail around in bbs knowning that you can not win the game anymore. If the stupid player in dds or the one or two CL on the team dies. 

100 % loss.

And how is that any different to having a single DD alive? Or a light cruiser alive? 

 

As a BB you are blind and can be outrun by those ships anyway. In fact you can prob out run a bloody Sub with only 1 to 4 tops in the water..not like 15 or 20 you would from a mino or Blenheim ect...wow

 

Subs cant cap quick and are slower then even your BB. What is will help with is those that sit at the back and snipe BBs. So I welcome that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-R-P]
Players
1,683 posts
15,630 battles
52 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

 

Wrong.

 

The Bismarck never had depth charges on their logs. They had the rails but were used for those signal and faulse low hit charges as I've already described. No depth charge ever got on the ship.

 

Only one class of heavy cruiser, the Aboa had them and only after a late refit. 

 

Only RN light crusiers had them, no York or county class (heavy) ever had depth charges, not even the rack. So the Essex at tier 5 wont have them for instance which is the only current heavy RN cruiser.

 

But yeah, all other light cruisers and DDs should have them. Ships like the Des,  Balti, Buff, zao, Hindy, hipper ect wont have them and never did. But ships like the mino (prob), chappy, Colbert ect will.

 

Well saying that Cleveland class never had them, didnt even have the rails. But you Atlanta captain's will be happy, they had lots of depth charges.:cap_tea:

 

Confirmed, the only US cruiser heavy or light to ever have depth charges were the Atlanta class. Sucks to be US with subs I guess now. Even the woster didn't have them or anything to even launch them off.

So what an instalation was mounted on stern of Maya? 

Spoiler

83728fef83a27e832b49a5073aea5299.jpg

Maya36cm.jpg

Maya13cm.jpg

 

Models had to be based on some data especially if this is done by real PRO.

 

So why HMS Exeter had single rack on many blueprints? I'm sure that I saw similar racks on various blueprints like:

 

Also I saw Kent and London with rack:

 

Also as I remember newest HMS Exeter/York kits by Trumpeter had them. Asking seriously.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
989 posts
9,699 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

One of the biggest messes is that every ship can do anything to anyone.

 

Hence why there is no team support what so ever in random. When will they learn.

No.

 

There is very little team support in randoms, because Random gamemode is designed like that. Randoms are not designed do have well orchestrate teamplay. Nor can it be enforced.

 

 

In Random battles, everybody should be able to do atleast something against everybody else.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
[GURKA]
Players
3,386 posts
7,921 battles

DD players should be happy, they get more "easy" prey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×