General Submarines related discussions

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

30 minutes ago, Spearhawk1969 said:

Foxer was the code name for a British built acoustic decoy used to confuse German acoustic homing torpedoes

These little tidbits make me realise again what a failure this developer really is in regards to fun gameplay.

[Sunleader]

20 hours ago, FloatingTarget said:

 

Lol, if that is true (which I question as I see plenty of CVs) what does that tell you? I know what it tells me. It tells me that the players who like to play one type of broken grief machine are migrating or trying out another broken grief machine. Also, maybe, just maybe the players here on this forum play World Of Warships too? Have you considered that the hate against subs here may be a sample of the general ire overall?

 

And yea man, I got it all figured out. Next time I'll activate my ships shield to absorb the unavoidable magic torpedoes and then send out my hunter seeker missiles to target and destroy the enemy who I can't see but keeps pinging me and spamming me with torpedoes every nano-second. Easy peasy. 

 

Do You ?

How many Games with 3 CVs per SIde do You get each day ? :)

 

And well Mate.

None of us got Shields. Yet we Evade these Unavoidable Magic Torpedoes constantly.

Needless to say that I have a feeling. If You ever dared Playing a Submarine. You would Miss quite ALOT of these Unavoidable Magic Torpedoes. :)

Sorry to be Blunt. But You got an L2P Issue. Thats all there is to it.

 

9 minutes ago, Europizza said:

These little tidbits make me realise again what a failure this developer really is in regards to fun gameplay.

 

Why not Leave the Game then ? :)

If its not Fun to Play then I really see no Reason why You should bother with it.

Games are meant to be Fun. If You dont have Fun Playing them then doing so is effectively self imposed torture.

[SmegTheNoob]

56 minutes ago, Spearhawk1969 said:

actually, if you want realism, the way torps worked was after the pitch of the engine it was targetted so once fired unless the engine changed pitch the torps went home.
BUT that required 3 or more working "radars". to pinpoint the origin of the engine

An acoustic torpedo is a torpedo that aims itself by listening for characteristic sounds of its target or by searching for it using sonar (acoustic homing).

 

However...good news, and I am sure WG will implement them (in years to come)....

Foxer was the code name for a British built acoustic decoy used to confuse German acoustic homing torpedoes

Well, I would say that 80% of Torpedoes in WW2 were of the pre-programmed variety.

IE those that had to have a solution plotted before firing, based on the target ships speed and course.

Or in other words, the torp mechanic that every other ship class in the game has.

IE Submarines SHOULD have the same Torp mechanic as DD's.

 

None of this pathetic homing crap.

I also think that torpedoes should have a random failure mechanic.

Many torps in WW2 would be DUDS, and not explode when they hit a ship.

I think Wargaming should build a failure mechanic into the game for torps.

[Sunleader]

22 hours ago, SmegTheNoob said:

Well, I would say that 80% of Torpedoes in WW2 were of the pre-programmed variety.

IE those that had to have a solution plotted before firing, based on the target ships speed and course.

Or in other words, the torp mechanic that every other ship class in the game has.

IE Submarines SHOULD have the same Torp mechanic as DD's.

 

None of this pathetic homing crap.

I also think that torpedoes should have a random failure mechanic.

Many torps in WW2 would be DUDS, and not explode when they hit a ship.

I think Wargaming should build a failure mechanic into the game for torps.

 

Then Submarines Should also be able to Dive for Weeks, 90% of the Ships should have no way of Seeing a Submarine at all even at Periscope Depth when its 200m away from them and a Single Submarine Torpedo should be enough to Sink Your Ship, Depth Charges would only be on Ships that actually had them and Calling a Depth Charge Airstrike would not be in the Match because it has to be called from Landlocked Airbases and need an Hour or Two to Arrive etc etc.

 

This is an Arcade Game. There is no Realism Involved here.

The only thing halfwat Realistic is the Ships Model. And even that only in Limited Cases for Historical Ships.

 

As such. Demanding a Ship to be made more Realistic is just a Cheap Excuse for Demanding Nerfs to that Ship.

 

 

 

[RamboCras]

On 2/14/2023 at 12:35 PM, Cuddly_Spider said:

 

How long does it take for a sub to reload all its torps?

 

How long does it then take for all those torps to reach you if it is out of ASW range?

 

I assure you, it's considerably longer than 35 seconds.

 

What were you doing during those minutes?

Can you read? A sub can reload in less than 30 seconds. If you have ANY experience in WoW you know that the turning of BB needs more time, how much more depends on the BB. Also, you lose speed when making the turn, drop back to 20knts or so. Subs torpedoes go 93 knts, 12km range, 7.8k damage or 72 knts, 10k range 15k damage (Balao).

 

Conclusion, if the Sub is within 8km and you need to turn away. You will always be hit twice (2 x 6 torps), either 93.6k damage or 150k damage

 

Ps. with torpedo reload training (-15%) but not counting the extra damage skill (+15%) or the adrenaline reload boost.

[RamboCras]

Just had a Sub in my team made 144XP, 270 games experience of which 75 (27 wins) in a tier X submarine....

[BLUB__BLUB]

22 hours ago, SmegTheNoob said:

None of this pathetic homing crap.

I think acoustic torpedoes would be better. They'd be slower (as in real life, because else they'd follow their own noise) than the normal torpedoes. 
And the way to avoid them, would be to be to stop the engines - else they'd keep tracking you. Or actually, they'd track the target that they were closest to when "going active". 

Which could be funny, if you manage to steer such that they lead back to the sub...  oh damn they have abolished team damage. 

 

13 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Demanding a Ship to be made more Realistic is just a Cheap Excuse for Demanding Nerfs to that Ship.

That depends. For example I think torpedoes should be almost guaranteed flooding, unless they hit the torpedo belt. 
Realistic doesn't mean 'NERFBAT' as such. Acoustic torpedoes would, in real life, explode under the ship and break the keel.
So that should be implemented as well: explosion under the keel = 4 floodings, needing 2x DCP and the heal running or else = death.

 

But you should also have that diversion-option. 

 

[SmegTheNoob]

37 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

Then Submarines Should also be able to Dive for Weeks, 90% of the Ships should have no way of Seeing a Submarine at all even at Periscope Depth when its 200m away from them and a Single Submarine Torpedo should be enough to Sink Your Ship, Depth Charges would only be on Ships that actually had them and Calling a Depth Charge Airstrike would not be in the Match because it has to be called from Landlocked Airbases and need an Hour or Two to Arrive etc etc.

 

This is an Arcade Game. There is no Realism Involved here.

The only thing halfwat Realistic is the Ships Model. And even that only in Limited Cases for Historical Ships.

 

As such. Demanding a Ship to be made more Realistic is just a Cheap Excuse for Demanding Nerfs to that Ship.

 

 

 

Look pal. I never called for any ship to be made more realistic.

I know full well that Wargaming pick and choose when to apply the realistic metaphor.

EG when they turned round and said that Okhotnik could not have depth charges because it did not have them in real life.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

42 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

For example I think torpedoes should be almost guaranteed flooding, unless they hit the torpedo belt. 

that is already happening........

[BLUB__BLUB]

31 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

that is already happening........

Well, I do not get hit that much but usually I do not get flooding. 
Maybe I am finally lucky with something then.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

1 minute ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well, I do not get hit that much but usually I do not get flooding. 
Maybe I am finally lucky with something then.

you get guaranteed floods on bow and stern of most ships 

[BLUB__BLUB]

5 hours ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

you get guaranteed floods on bow and stern of most ships 

Never noticed it much happening. Does FP captain skill work against that too?

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

7 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Never noticed it much happening. Does FP captain skill work against that too?

 

It works only against fires

[Panocek]

14 hours ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

you get guaranteed floods on bow and stern of most ships 

Not so much guaranteed, as baseline flood chance is applied when torpedo hits area without torpedo belt ie bow or stern.

 

For surface ship based torps, that is guaranteed flood as chance is over 100% not counting funny tiers, but for airborne torps it is between 23-66%. Tech tree submarine torps have flood chance between 31-35% for guided torps, while unguided have 73-90%

 

Presence of a torpedo belt, according to wiki, cuts flood chance to 1/3rd BEFORE applying visible torpedo damage reduction multiplier to flood chance. Quick maff, and best submarine torpedo in terms of flood chance, unguided Balao, goes down from 90% to 14% when striking Yamato torpedo belt. The same Balao firing homing torp and striking Yamato torpedo belt have not very impressive 4.6% flood chance.

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 hour ago, Panocek said:

Not so much guaranteed, as baseline flood chance is applied when torpedo hits area without torpedo belt ie bow or stern.

Ah damn, and I was thinking I might be very lucky, for once. Not! 

[El2aZeR]

Quote

Added interactive music for submarines. It matches their special dynamic and stealthy gameplay.

 

WG as usual showing their excellence. The music now matches sub gameplay perfectly by being completely broken. 

[st_dasa]

I could kill more than a half of the enemy team, even had a Kearsarge to spot those who tried to flee, but this super unicum sub had a perfect counter-tactic; he just dived and could not be spotted for the last 5 mins of the match. I was on top of him with my hydro, but with an unicum move, he scraped the bottom and shut every valve, cat and German on his tiny U-boat. A true tactician.

 

Spoiler: sub was a 47% WR player

 

Lovely design WG.

 

[FloatingTarget]

Remember when people said they didn't want Subs and Wargaming decided to add more Subs? Yea, me too.

[NewHorizons_1]

14 minutes ago, FloatingTarget said:

Remember when people said they didn't want Subs and Wargaming decided to add more Subs? Yea, me too.

Some even remember when WG said they didn't want to add subs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

[SmegTheNoob]

34 minutes ago, NewHorizons_1 said:

Some even remember when WG said they didn't want to add subs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

I do hope that video comes back to haunt Wargaming in the future.

They knew back when this video was made that WARGAMING WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO  BALANCE SUBMARINES FAIRLY.

That has been proved the case, but still all they see is the whales playing them.

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, NewHorizons_1 said:

Some even remember when WG said they didn't want to add subs. ¯\_(ツ)_/

 

 

Yet You keep forgetting that the community kept asking for Subs again and again for WG to be forced to constantly comment on it.

[lovelacebeer]

17 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

Yet You keep forgetting that the community kept asking for Subs again and again for WG to be forced to constantly comment on it.

There was certainly a dedicated movement calling for subs they never appeared a large group but I can’t fault their determination. 
 

Actually it proved quite enlightening to check out some of the profiles of people calling for the addition of submarines on WG’s Facebook and Instagram. 

[Sunleader]

3 hours ago, lovelacebeer said:

There was certainly a dedicated movement calling for subs they never appeared a large group but I can’t fault their determination. 
 

Actually it proved quite enlightening to check out some of the profiles of people calling for the addition of submarines on WG’s Facebook and Instagram. 

 

And Yet. This Small Group apparently promised enough Profits for WG to listen to them.

Meanwhile your obviously gigantic Group that doesnt want Submarines seems to be rather worthless as WG doesnt even bother giving You Proper Answers.

 

That Tiny Group of Dedicatet Sub Lovers must be Quite the Billionaires Club to outweigh You.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

8 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

And Yet. This Small Group apparently promised enough Profits for WG to listen to them.

Meanwhile your obviously gigantic Group that doesnt want Submarines seems to be rather worthless as WG doesnt even bother giving You Proper Answers.

 

That Tiny Group of Dedicatet Sub Lovers must be Quite the Billionaires Club to outweigh You.

Yeah how can it possibly be that such a small group of players full of weird people who like subs (imagine liking subs wow) made WG put them into the game? They must be responsible for at least half of WGs earnings 

[Tanaka_15]

Simple wg looks for new players as new income. Current players are worthless for them. So yeah small group of new players and new income is more important to them