General Submarines related discussions

[Cammo1962]

1 hour ago, Shirakami_Kon said:

So, I came across this checking on the NA forums.

 

 

That's how many times the torpedo tubes and ping of a single submarine broke when being targeted by the depth charges and shells of the player that posted this. I assume everyone here knows that basic mechanic detail, but just to make sure, for those that may not know, everytime a module on a ship breaks it means that module took at least one shell/plane bomb/rocket/depth charge... you name it, and the module well, broke, obviously. But the way the game is programmed when a module breaks that shell/bomb/rocket/depth charge, whatever the cause was dealt 0 damage to the HP of the ship or submarine.

 

So what this image here means, is that a single submarine took 11 hits that dealt 0 damage to it because of the constant destruction of it's modules. Now, I understand that since the entire weaponry of a submarine consists in it's torpedos, and WG is completely stubborn about not removing the ping they need those torpedo tubes and ping. So apparently the route they took is that submarine ping and torpedo tubes can't be permanently destroyed, like happens with modules of every other class in the game, where after so many hits the module will permanently destroy to stop absorbing damage to no end.

 

Just imagine what happened if to put an example Yamato's secondaries and AA guns weren't ever permanently destroyed, considering almost the entire superstructure is fully covered in it. Something like a destroyer without torpedos like Druid or a light cruiser without torpedos either would never be done with it since the secondaries and AA would keep permanently repairing to absorb damage for absolutely free.

 

So why is this not considered a problem in the case of submarines? We have multiple videos, and us players have already come across situations like this one here.

 

You can have dozens and dozens of depth charges or shell hits on a submarine and the thing just doesn't die, leaving players frustrated and wondering why. Well, the constant repair of modules so they keep constantly absorbing dep`th charges for the submarine for 0 damage seems a real issue in this case.

 

So why is this a thing? As said before, I understand that for a submarine, where torpedos are all it uses WG decided that the permanent destruction of the torpedo tubes and ping is a no-go, to prevent a submarine to remain in battle absolutely incapable of doing anything (other than suicide by ramming something I guess). While that is fair for the submarine it screws all damage they take, not to mantion how hard it can be to find one and do so to begin with when you're against one that knows what to do and how to properly remain stealthy all game (which why still very rare considering that so far a tier 5 max player could get his hands on a tier 10 sub happens where the opposing sub is an experienced player).

 

I'd like to make a suggestion about this. Just make the sonar and torpedo tubes of submarines indestructible. They need them, there's absolutely 0 point really in them breaking since that would lead to situatons where submarines would end up being completely useless and that can't really be allowed from a gameplay standpoint, I can agree with that. But those modules breaking in such insane amounts screws so much how to deal with them. That previous result in the image and video is absolutely stupid, so my suggestion is make submarine modules indestructible, they keep their weapons that they need because they literally only have their torps and ping, but that would at least make it so is you actually manage to get hits on one the game doesn't completely screw you like currently.

I agree with most of what you write except for this why do subs have to get special treament and do we want them to bee like CVs where it is nearly impossinle to set them on fire ??

[Shirakami_Kon]

4 minutes ago, Cammo1962 said:

I agree with most of what you write except for this why do subs have to get special treament and do we want them to bee like CVs where it is nearly impossinle to set them on fire ??

Sure, I don't really want that either, but if damage consistency when dealing with them instead of the joke of a lottery that damaging them currently is my proposition is something I'd abide to.

 

Also I didn't say anything about them being unable to be set on fire or flood, that has nothing to do with them getting their modules destroyed. My suggestion is merely to remove module destruction for subs since it nullifies an absurd amount of the damage they take. Fires and flood mechanics should of course be kept as for everyone else.

[Cammo1962]

2 minutes ago, Shirakami_Kon said:

Sure, I don't really want that either, but if damage consistency when dealing with them instead of the joke of a lottery that damaging them currently is my proposition is something I'd abide to.

 

Also I didn't say anything about them being unable to be set on fire or flood, that has nothing to do with them getting their modules destroyed. My suggestion is merely to remove module destruction for subs since it nullifies an absurd amount of the damage they take. Fires and flood mechanics should of course be kept as for everyone else.

You misunderstod me with the part of CVs and nearly not be able to set them on fire it was just an example from top of my head @Shirakami_Kon 

[lup3s]

5 hours ago, OldSchoolFrankie said:

Just dodge..

 

 

Yepp, looks like really good game design!

 

Difficult to tell if this player used DCP just to mitigate torpedo homing, or to also repair a fire / flooding ?

(since at the start it only says "torpedo homing mitigated")

 

If the former were the case, then this is a misplay by the Zao imo.

[ross1193]

DELETE SUBS! REPORT ALL SUBS AND SINK AS MANY AS YOU CAN IN THE MEANTIME! THATS ALL GL HF

[anonym_cwVecOS6ecVy]

The best this game has to offer in 59 seconds:

 

 

[JohnMac79]

After seeing how broken subs are for months, WG decides they need yet more time to be able to see what anyone with a brain can see...

 

Like i said the other day, i dont know if it is gross and laughable incompetence, or they are just griefing the playerbase for roubles.

 

Probably both.

 

[_TedStriker]

Weeeeeeeeeeee! What fun!

 

[KaptVic]

Fix ths subs... it is unplayable with subs. The concept is not working guys!!!

[COPlUM]

12 hours ago, Auerstedt said:

I have one question: why does the "Hydroaccoustic search" consumable not spot submarines? Seems like a perfrect way to get the whole affair at least somewhat balanced.

It does technically, that is the only way for a select few surface ships to spot them, but only at less than 2.0km range and since submarines outspot, outmaneuver and outrun everything else, whoever is playing the submarine needs to have a whole box of crayons 6 inches deep in their nose to stumble directly underneath a ship that has hydro. Even if the submarine has crayons so deep in their nasal cavity that the crayon is touching their pre-frontal cortex and they do in fact find themselves directly under a hindenburg or something, the submarine is still in a better position than the hindenburg, it can shotgun the hindenburg to death while the hindenburg can drop depth charges of which he needs about 25 hits to kill it, maybe. Like the submarine needs to be a good boi and sit directly underneath the hindenburg for 4-5 minutes without moving or doing anything, then you can kill it. It also needs to promise you to stay directly underneath you for a few minutes after your hydro runs out.

Depends too on which ship you are using with hydro, some ships poop the useless depth charges out the sides, some poop them out the back, some even shoot them 3km forward for maximum trolling, if you have a ship like that, submarine can sit directly underneath you, within your hydro range, maneuver to remain directly underneath you, and since your ship can only poop out depth charges 3km in front of it, you cant ever actually do anything to the submarine, even while it is directly underneath you and hydrod

Same thing with battleships, the submarine can sit on your forehead because your ASW has a max range of 6km and a min range of 2km, the sub can choose = Sit just outside of 6km and ping you ad nauseum or come up to you and sit right next to you and do it from there, it matters not to him, either way you have no way of doing damage to it, the game mechanics to damage them have not yet been implemented.

The only reason this class is not absolutely crushing wows now is the people playing them, they are given to people who installed the game yesterday, most people drive them around submerged for no reason at all, they provide no spotting while doing so. From time to time they go *oh crap oxygen* they surface at an unfortunate time/place and die. When more submarine players figure out they should dive less and shotgun more, thats when you are all in for a real treat.

[ThePopesHolyFinger]

11 hours ago, OldSchoolFrankie said:

Just dodge..

 

 

Yepp, looks like really good game design!

This is why subs are retarded.
This is why people aren't going to play in games with subs.
Subs will always be retarded or will be nerfed to the state that no one wants to play them.
We'll never know which genius at weegee approved subs, but I pray a thousand gerbils gnaw him a new arsehole

[ghostbuster_]

2 minutes ago, DB2212 said:

This is why subs are retarded.
This is why people aren't going to play in games with subs.
Subs will always be retarded or will be nerfed to the state that no one wants to play them.
We'll never know which genius at weegee approved subs, but I pray a thousand gerbils gnaw him a new arsehole

Same "genius" who approved CV rework I think.

[The_Norwood]

They do seem to be only capable of shooting themselves in the foot these days, with a large calibre machine gun on full auto it seems.

[COPlUM]

I don't even care about the torpedoes or whatever, they are broken mechanically. I just played against 3 below average players, but turbo unicum in division in two gunboat DDs with a submarine, here is how it works
The submarine goes to the enemy destroyers, the submarine sits on their forehead and surfaces briefly. Enemy destroyers now have 2 choices :
A) Don't shoot the submarine, allow it to permanently spot you, this continues until you die, how good you are at the game determines how long before you die, but you will 100% die, there is no scenario in which you do not die.
B) Shoot the submarine,  it takes 300 damage and is back underwater, you are now lit for 30 seconds, this is repeated until you die, how good you are at the game determines how long before you die, but you will 100% die, there is no scenario in which you do not die.
It does not matter which choice you make, you die, there is no option in which you don't die, you can only pick how you wish to die and your skill only determines how long it takes for you to die, you will die, there is simply no way to not die.
Well there is one scenario in which you don't die, give them the cap, map control, spotting, all of it, just roll over and let them win, letting the enemy team win is the only alternative to death if you're up against this in a destroyer.

We need many more people abusing the absolute crap out of this until the game is entirely unplayable, then and only then will this adressed in some way. I'm asking everyone to please abuse the crap out of this, enjoy your 80% winrate, it's flawless.

[Fastmotion]

Many people like to repeat popular terms like "broken". That term is not adequate. Subs and CVs don't have any holes inside and nothing is broken. They are swimming around and place most of the times at the bottom of the results. If one believes in stats then being at the bottom of the results are low stats. If one don't believe in stats and says that actually the impact is greater than the stats show in that case provide explanations what kind of impact do you mean and avoid using stats on other questions later. Many people explain that specially for DDs stats don't show the input enough. For CVs some believe that CP is nerfed and stats show wrong numbers. For example if a cruiser and a Cv make 10k damage i nthe battle then they imply that the CV gets less less XP points at the end than the cruisers.

There is nothing broken and WG would fix if something were. It is naive and paranoid to react that WG don't care. WG is totally adequate.

[Cammo1962]

3 minutes ago, Fastmotion said:

Many people like to repeat popular terms like "broken". That term is not adequate. Subs and CVs don't have any holes inside and nothing is broken. They are swimming around and place most of the times at the bottom of the results. If one believes in stats then being at the bottom of the results are low stats. If one don't believe in stats and says that actually the impact is greater than the stats show in that case provide explanations what kind of impact do you mean and avoid using stats on other questions later. Many people explain that specially for DDs stats don't show the input enough. For CVs some believe that CP is nerfed and stats show wrong numbers. For example if a cruiser and a Cv make 10k damage i nthe battle then they imply that the CV gets less less XP points at the end than the cruisers.

There is nothing broken and WG would fix if something were. It is naive and paranoid to react that WG don't care. WG is totally adequate.

CVs and subs arfe broken and WG dont give a rats butt about it they are only interested in getting our money. So go and suck your thumb in a cornor because you are so f...ing deluted in your head num nut.

[COPlUM]

9 minutes ago, Fastmotion said:

They are swimming around and place most of the times at the bottom of the results.

Because they are giving them as rentals to people who installed the game yesterday, you know, to people who are only marginally better at the videogame than you.
Also because submarines get reduced XP gain, just like carriers, it is designed this way so you would not notice how they top the team 100% of the time.

[Fastmotion]

1 minute ago, COPlUM said:

Because they are giving them as rentals to people who installed the game yesterday, you know, to people who are only marginally better at the videogame than you.
Also because submarines get reduced XP gain, just like carriers, it is designed this way so you would not notice how they top the team 100% of the time.

People play more T9 premiums and rental T10 than Subs because propaganda has made people to feel sufferings towards subs/CVs and they are afraid to play them. That's why it is marginal to see newcomers on subs but you see them many times more often in in T9 prems as i explained. That makes the subs argument irrelevant.

[Tanaka_15]

31 minutes ago, Fastmotion said:

People play more T9 premiums and rental T10 than Subs because propaganda has made people to feel sufferings towards subs/CVs and they are afraid to play them. That's why it is marginal to see newcomers on subs but you see them many times more often in in T9 prems as i explained. That makes the subs argument irrelevant.

[viktor_jebaited]

35 minutes ago, Fastmotion said:

People play more T9 premiums and rental T10 than Subs because propaganda has made people to feel sufferings towards subs/CVs and they are afraid to play them. That's why it is marginal to see newcomers on subs but you see them many times more often in in T9 prems as i explained. That makes the subs argument irrelevant.

The amount of games, where I've seen players playing subs, with less than 500 battles is rly high, players that has no idea about the game. Like why give new players top tier ships, when the game in general is already too difficult for experienced players.

You are actually a good example of this -This playerbase doesnt know how the game works in general....I have 4.4k battles, I feel like a veteran. Basic mechanics are still too complicated eventhou you have players with more than 10k battles, they make the same mistakes over and over and over and over.... etc etc. 

Btw how on earth do you manage to achieve mighty 30k avg in a Bajie....Im baffled...I cant process that.  

[Fastmotion]

9 minutes ago, Kenneth_95 said:

The amount of games, where I've seen players playing subs, with less than 500 battles is rly high, players that has no idea about the game. Like why give new players top tier ships, when the game in general is already too difficult for experienced players.

You are actually a good example of this -This playerbase doesnt know how the game works in general....I have 4.4k battles, I feel like a veteran. Basic mechanics are still too complicated eventhou you have players with more than 10k battles, they make the same mistakes over and over and over and over.... etc etc. 

Btw how on earth do you manage to achieve mighty 30k avg in a Bajie....Im baffled...I cant process that.  

You say that you saw many Subs players and that fact proves an offtopical that many likes Subs.

Do you agreethat you saw more ofter premium ships than Subs? If you agree then you can address all your opinions from Subs to the premiums.

You ask about my stats about Bajie. I have given tens of times exmaples how different factors/methos help to achieve different stats. I don't repeat this time and if you make a separate topic and promise to stay only adequately in 1 that topic then i explain there again.

[viktor_jebaited]

30 minutes ago, Fastmotion said:

You say that you saw many Subs players and that fact proves an offtopical that many likes Subs.

Do you agreethat you saw more ofter premium ships than Subs? If you agree then you can address all your opinions from Subs to the premiums.

You ask about my stats about Bajie. I have given tens of times exmaples how different factors/methos help to achieve different stats. I don't repeat this time and if you make a separate topic and promise to stay only adequately in 1 that topic then i explain there again.

I dont ask about your stats, Im listing a fact. A fact that consist of numbers, and numbers dont lie.

 

Also, why are you trying to make it sound more difficult than it is..? like wtf is "different factors/methos" ?? Trying to make it more complicated when in fact its really simple, simple, basic mechanics :-)  

[Fastmotion]

1 hour ago, Kenneth_95 said:

I dont ask about your stats, Im listing a fact. A fact that consist of numbers, and numbers dont lie.

 

Also, why are you trying to make it sound more difficult than it is..? like wtf is "different factors/methos" ?? Trying to make it more complicated when in fact its really simple, simple, basic mechanics :-)  

You listed a factual number. As well you can say a fact that the year in 2022 and use any other numbers. There is no need to cal lsuch numbers fact or fictions because calling them facts don't prove any arguments. There is no point to say that 2022 or 21 or 5 are facts.

You ask why there are many factors. The answer is that this is the reality. In life you have many factors. For example, do you know that internet is bad for many people? Do you know that accounts are shared between brothers? Do you know that some people answer phone calls as their main job the whole day etc. These factors are facts. Nobody makes anything complicated the life is for very many like i described. Why should anybody believe in a naive simplistic world where al lfactors are ideal?

At the end you say that some kind of game mechanics are simple. That means that in your opinion i don't understand some kind of mechanics. But i can show you my tutorials in this forum where is teach those mechanics, give advice to new gold members and so on. Why can't you do that or show which of my teachings in my previous posts have been wrong about mechanics and other things?

Maybe the real answer is that you don't have the competence to teach about mechanics as i do. sounds logical and not complicated, right? If you don't understand the things then you don't teach others, logical. So, why do you think that i don't know something but you know? I am sure you can't define even a term Mechanics. I have proven such things many times earlier.

If you believe that i can't play with some ships today then can you explain with a decent explanation? If you use historical stats as a tool to prove anything then that is not a valid method because today is not a history. I have provided brainwashed people a demonstration where i showed that stats are an inadequate tool. I won that debate clearly. Because beside hundreds of theoretical arguments i showed that i made a different results during the planned 44 battles than they believed based on the stats. I can provide such demos more in the future but there should be an adequate reason to do so. For example it is not an adequate to prove anything in a style "prove that you are good". No, i don't prove any such egoic goal. But "prove that stas are always wrong" that i can demo and prove again.If you want to see the truth for a Bajie demo then you must first sign rules where you state that after the proof you agree that you were wrong and so on. Otherwise you will at the end start to say that i had rare luck and just deny the proof.

[Shirakami_Kon]

1 hour ago, Kenneth_95 said:

I dont ask about your stats, Im listing a fact. A fact that consist of numbers, and numbers dont lie.

 

Also, why are you trying to make it sound more difficult than it is..? like wtf is "different factors/methos" ?? Trying to make it more complicated when in fact its really simple, simple, basic mechanics :-)  

You're wasting your time with him, really... Just put him in your ignore list and preserve some braincells, you'll thank me later.

[The_Norwood]

Weegee have already admitted CVs are broken, and also stated they don't know how to fix it. Clearly the second part was horse excrement because we since found out that they want CVs to be broken so more people play them. Not one to learn from their mistakes, Weegee are now doing exactly the same thing with subs, which have historically inaccurate radar homing torps, can travel as fast as a destroyer while submerged, cannot be picked up by a device that was literally invented to pick up submarines etc...

If you don't think the CVs are broken, take a look at pre rework CVs, considered highly overpowered, and then look at the counters and weaknesses that used to exist that have been completely removed to the point where is a CV is nearly untouchable. I mean, imagine the audacity of wanting to be able to affect the outcome of a CV attacking you by putting up an adequate defence? Ludicrous.