When will you fix ramming?

[StanleyHTweedle]

Quick question for Wargaming: when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor etc... especially with subs coming.... especially since some ships (notably destroyers and submarines) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic? @MrConway @Crysantos? :) 

[NothingButTheRain]

11 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

Quick question for Wargaming: when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor etc... especially with subs coming.... especially since some ships (notably destroyers and submarines) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic? @MrConway @Crysantos? :) 

[StanleyHTweedle]

@NothingButTheRain I gather that you're trying to ridicule the idea? :-) Or am I reading you wrong?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramming explains some of it, the rest I know from actual books.

[NobleRipper]

31 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

Quick question for Wargaming: when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor etc... especially with subs coming.... especially since some ships (notably large warships built before the first world war, after which time navies mostly dispensed with any actual ram bows and tended to discard the idea as anything other than a desperation tactic) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic? @MrConway @Crysantos? :) 

Fixed it for you

[StanleyHTweedle]

@NobleSauvage Did you take the time to read (at least the wiki page I linked) or are you just pretending in hope of triggering a fellow forumsman?

[principat121]

42 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

Quick question for Wargaming: when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor etc...

The current ramming mechanic ingame actually already includes all of these variables. 

[CptBarney]

7 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

@NobleSauvage Did you take the time to read (at least the wiki page I linked) or are you just pretending in hope of triggering a fellow forumsman?

While i do agree with how ramming should take into account more factors (like world of tanks does with speed, weight, angle, armour thickness). Although im not entirely too versed on how complex the ram system in this game is, its basically a waste of resources for weegee to try and improve or make more realistic.

 

The game is basically an arcadey tactical shooter, treat it as such, untill UA:D comes out or warthunder naval forces (from when i last played warthunder their ram systems were horrible anyways).

 

EDIT: Nevermind @principat121 Just clapped meh ;w;

[T0byJug]

1 hour ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

Quick question for Wargaming: when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor etc... especially with subs coming.... especially since some ships (notably destroyers and submarines) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic? @MrConway @Crysantos? :) 

 

 

mmmmmm Really. please tell me one class of DD/Sub that was built with ramming in mind..???

 

Yes ramming was used by DD's corvette and other anti-sub boats in both wars but always it was an act of desperation. Ramming as a battle tactic was something of ancient history. was resurrected  briefly in the late 18th century as a thing built in to ships but was quickly abandoned.

 

But was never a thing in the timespan of this game.

 

And no I am not including Boats like the German Linse boats.. The ship classed that we have in this game apart from MAYBE a couple of the tier  II or III  were not designed with any type of ramming BOW 

 

Even your wikipedia link point's out that the ships that rammed were not designed for it.

[StanleyHTweedle]

All the above. First read actual books and memoires of actual captains and then spill your "wisdom", okay? The level of laymanship you guys parade out with astounds me.

[Riggerby]

Ehhhh, For a reference to real life, HMS Glowworm rammed the Admiral Hipper, Glowworm's bow was sheared off and she went under not long later, A.Hipper took on a load of water but was relatively okay.

 

(Spoiler as the images contain the swastika on Hipper's bow)

 

Spoiler

 

If you were to try this ingame, The destroyer would instantly explode and the cruiser would be hurt but still floating, Pretty similar to irl.

 

Personally i wouldn't like to see destroyers be capable of causing extreme damage via ramming. Much of the DD playerbase is suicidal enough as it is and i don't have the mental fortitude to watch my own DD's make a B-Line straight to the nearest battleship to try and ram them. 

[T0byJug]

1 minute ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

All the above. First read actual books and memoires of actual captains and then spill your "wisdom", okay? The level of laymanship you guys parade out with astounds me.

Go on then list some of these ships that rammed  (such as HMS Glowworm ) that were built with ramming in mind as a combat tactic. on ship designed and built lat 19th and 20th century's 

[NobleRipper]

19 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

@NobleSauvage Did you take the time to read (at least the wiki page I linked) or are you just pretending in hope of triggering a fellow forumsman?

Did you? Because it has this to say about the topic:

 

"In World War II, naval ships often rammed other vessels, though this was often due to circumstances, as considerable damage could be caused to the attacking ship. The damage that lightly constructed destroyers took from the tactic led to it being officially discouraged by the Royal Navy from early 1943, after HMS Hesperus was dry-docked for three months following sinking U-357 in December 1942 and HMS Harvester was torpedoed and sunk following damaging her propellers during the ramming of U-444 in March 1943. USS Buckley rammed U-66; and HMS Easton rammed U-458." (Strikethrough is mine to correct the usual poorly-sourced Wiki hyperbole.)

 

A better link would have been https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_ram#Twentieth_century which again attests to the impromptu nature of ramming as a tactic, as I indicated. As someone who has read quite a bit on naval architecture, I would be most interested to hear of any sources you have that attest to any destroyers and/or submarines being 'specifically equipped for ramming as a battle tactic'.

 

As regards the general topic though, ramming is currently enough of a marginal occurrence that it wouldn't seem to warrant the extra calculations required, certainly not on the same scale as something like shell penetration which already takes the factors mentioned into account. Of course with submarines that may change, but the rule of 'the smaller ship goes boom and a greater or lesser amount of damage is inflicted on the larger ship' would seem to cover that anyway.

8 minutes ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

All the above. First read actual books and memoires of actual captains and then spill your "wisdom", okay? The level of laymanship you guys parade out with astounds me.

Now I'd really like to hear about your sources...

[T0byJug]

 

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, NobleSauvage said:

.

Now I'd really like to hear about your sources...

me too

[NobleRipper]

30 minutes ago, T0byJug said:

Ramming as a battle tactic was something of ancient history. was resurrected  briefly in the laet 18th century as a thing built in to ships but was quickly abandoned.

Specifically it was here (one of my favourite episodes in naval history, although it doesn't fill me with confidence for grinding the Italian cruisers! ): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_(1866)

[KillStealBoss]

1 hour ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

especially since some ships (notably destroyers and submarines) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic?

Can you give any example?

 

[principat121]

1 hour ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

especially since some ships (notably destroyers and submarines) were specifically equipped for ramming as battle tactic?

I guess you do not mind to bring up some sources to back up your statement?

 

Especially as your question...

1 hour ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

when will you fix ramming to include factors such as speed, angle, armor

...was already answered. The answer was: The game already do take into account of these factors. 

[T0byJug]

 

 

 

2

3 minutes ago, principat121 said:

I guess you do not mind to bring up some sources to back up your statement?

 

Especially as your question...

...was already answered. The answer was: The game already do take into account of these factors. 

Here you go..CSS David from 1863...

 

OK OK she was a Torpedo boat and the idea was the explosive charge on the boom would hit the target and the David would survive to sail away.. But I think this may be as close as we get...  

[principat121]

looks like a future american tier2 premium uboat

[Zemeritt]

1 hour ago, principat121 said:

The current ramming mechanic ingame actually already includes all of these variables. 

 

And any formulas to share?

Because I've seen quite some weird stuff happen during rams.

[NobleRipper]

@T0byJug Can't seem to quote your post directly, but how about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Hunley_(submarine) (this one was a submarine!)

[Jethro_Grey]

2 hours ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

All the above. First read actual books and memoires of actual captains and then spill your "wisdom", okay? The level of laymanship you guys parade out with astounds me.

Pls provide sources for your claim, cause the one wiki link you yourself provided proves only that your wrong. 

 

I gotta say tho, based on your posts in this thread, you honor your nick name!* 

 

 

*In case someone is curious, google “Lexx - the dark zone” and Stanley Tweedle. 

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 9 Stunden, CptBarney sagte:

The game is basically an arcadey tactical shooter, treat it as such, untill UA:D comes out or warthunder naval forces (from when i last played warthunder their ram systems were horrible anyways).

The game's ramming mechanism is the very same as in the original Pacman. Sophisticated coding from 1980...

[HassenderZerhacker]

9 hours ago, StanleyHTweedle said:

All the above. First read actual books and memoires of actual captains and then spill your "wisdom", okay? The level of laymanship you guys parade out with astounds me.

 

Considering the influence of real physical factors in the game, it is not necessary at all for the game to reflect any level of realism. Implementing careful ramming where the rammer has actually good chances of surviving would be a good addition.

Actually, in real life, large ships built for battle after 1935 had good chances to survive ramming due to them being able to seal front compartments.

[Hanse77SWE]

Most time I see someone ram it's a total waste of a ship and a sign of a bad player that can't use his tools in a efficient way. Don't encourage that kind of bad behavior please.

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 5 Minuten, Hanse77SWE sagte:

Most time I see someone ram it's a total waste of a ship and a sign of a bad player that can't use his tools in a efficient way. Don't encourage that kind of bad behavior please.

I totally agree. Deliberate ramming should result in a penalty if your own ship is destroyed in the process and had more remaining health than the target. It may be ok if you ram as a last ditch effort when facing a much more healthy opponent, but throwing away a barely damaged ship unnecessarily because you can't hit a barn door with your guns is disgusting.