General Submarines related discussions

[Cirno9999]

well either you make subs go faster or start in them close to the cap zone or 2 rows in front of dds - what will it be

also depth charges seem to be unavoidable

[mariouus]

35 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

All ships have the 5.5 coefficient for speed, as far I know. That is value type 1

Ships have stats in game like speed. Yamato has 27 knots, Balao in game has 30 knots. That is value type 2.

Do you actually understand what this coefficent is?

 

Uss Balao in game is actually not a GUPPY conversion (regular bow) - its Fleet Snorkel Conversion - USS Sabalo in fact. So we are talking about 20.knots surface 9.knots submerge. So it is 3,2 times faster in game (submerged). Meaning that USS "Baloa" actually has coefficent of 17,7 

 

With XXI its mutch better - it has actual Coefficent of only 10. They only more or less doubled its actual speed. Unlike on "Baloa" where they tripeled"

 

 

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

7 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

It would be yes, except WG doesn't because they would have to make the consumable permanent because without it active players wouldn't want to play submarines. See the problem?

It would be a pointless change. Unlogically. It's like you would add a Fuel-consumable. You start with 0 Fuel, but when you press the consumable, you get 20 mins fuel. Would be totally pointless consumable xD

 

7 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

No I don't think so, I think you're purposefully not understanding what I write because you don't like not having an actual argument to counter it other then 'tough luck, it's just your preference that you want realistic speeds'.

Then explain me the speed coefficient. What is the speed coefficient for all ships, planes, torpedos in this game. And what is the speed coefficient for all submarines.

As I said, you mixed up some terms/values.

 

10 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

don't like not having an actual argument

But you are ignoring most of my explanations, reading only half if not less, and then claiming false things, quoting me wrong, and when I confront you with the false claim, you keep ignoring them. Saying "Oh, you wouldn't understand". If you don't start to actual discuss, it's pretty pointless.

 

I add all the time references, but those get ignored all the time. I see, how those not get quoted.

 

14 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

23 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The sad thing is just, you seem still to ignore all my points and doesn't proof anything.

I'm not going to, and I already have.  

1 hour ago, mtm78 said:

Except it is not.

^that's not a proof

Just saying

 

 

21 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

You already proven me right

Except I didn't. ;)

I mean, probably you mean it "right", but you used wrong definitions. Guess that's the issue

 

15 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

you just don't want to accept it. 

You are wrong. You just keep missing the point, and while being in that wrong believe, you think I don't accept it.

 

• You said, that the speed coefficient is diffrent for submarines. I told you, that is not the case, every ship has the factor 5.5
• I told you, you are talking about the ship stats, not the speed coefficient. The ship stats are for submarines higher, than irl. I said that very early, I quoted it multiple times, please understand that
• I also explained you, why submarines have higher speed stats. I did that yesterday, I quoted it for you today.
• I told you, that DDs mostly have way higher max speeds, than irl. Kleber is the extreme example.
• I told you, that also planes are extremly slower, than irl.

 

2 hours ago, mtm78 said:

2 hours ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The Coefficient is for all the same

Except it is not. 

Proof it. What is the speed coefficient of Submarines?

 

24 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

No, All OTHER SHIPS have a more accurate value, EXCEPT ALL SUBMARINES. And that is the issue. And I can't be more clear, and you can write walls of text however you want, it's not changing the fact submarines break immersion when added in a game where they move 50% faster as in real life ( and that's on the surface, not sure what speed it has underwater in game ). 

Yes, and my answer was. If it's for you immersion breaking, fine. For me it's less immersion breaking than a chaotic pvp battle with Kremlins, Smolensk, Super-Yamatos and BB-melting DDs.

You quoted me initially. You said, it's your personal preference.

I said, that is okay. But that is not my personal preference, and I gave examples why. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

32 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

All your 'questions' and talking around this single simple fact is nothing but deflection and rehashed WG PR bull.

No idea, where is the context here?

 

32 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

I'm not feeling immersed when even talking about these mechanics, let alone the frustration I would feel in game actually experiencing it. 

Up to you, as I said way earlier. And while I can accept your decision, you might accept my decision. And since this is a discussion, it's obvious, that I explain my statments. I don't see, why that is an issue.

Though what I can't agree with, if there discussion becomes personal, while ignoring the acutal statements. My person has nothing to do with a statement. When I say 1+1=2, then it doesn't matter, who I am. The statement is still correct.

And that's what is so annoying in forums, when people go for personal discrediting, instead of actual arugments.

 

When I go with

 

Statement + argument + explanation/proof

 

Then I expect

 

Counter-Statement + Counter argument + proofs for that

 

But what I mostly get

"No, you wrong" "No, you lying"

 

That is really no argumentation, and many seem not to understand that.

[johncl]

Playing subs is not so bad ..I would say 60% done ....Playing against them ...I would say 80% more works is needed 

[Pikkozoikum]

Just now, mariouus said:

Do you actually understand what this coefficent is?

 

Uss Balao in game is actually not a GUPPY conversion (regular bow) - its Fleet Snorkel Conversion - USS Sabalo in fact. So we are talking about 20.knots surface 9.knots submerge. So it is 3,2 times faster in game (submerged). Meaning that USS "Baloa" actually has coefficent of 17,7 

 

With XXI its mutch better - it has actual Coefficent of only 10. They only more or less doubled its actual speed. Unlike on "Baloa" where they tripeled"

 

 

 

 

 

The coeffiecient is 5.5 applied on the 30 knots of the ship stat

We don't have a conversion coefficient from realistic speed -> in game speed.

It's a ingame stats times the 5.5 coefficient.

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

9 minutes ago, Cirno9999 said:

well either you make subs go faster or start in them close to the cap zone or 2 rows in front of dds - what will it be

also depth charges seem to be unavoidable

Think they could be a bit closer, maybe.

[mtm78]

12 minutes ago, mariouus said:

Do you actually understand what this coefficent is?

 

Uss Balao in game is actually not a GUPPY conversion (regular bow) - its Fleet Snorkel Conversion - USS Sabalo in fact. So we are talking about 20.knots surface 9.knots submerge. So it is 3,2 times faster in game (submerged). Meaning that USS "Baloa" actually has coefficent of 17,7 

 

With XXI its mutch better - it has actual Coefficent of only 10. They only more or less doubled its actual speed. Unlike on "Baloa" where they tripeled"

 

 

Don't bother, he understand he just enjoys having turned this game into Steel Ocean with better graphics. 

[mariouus]

10 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The coeffiecient is 5.5 applied on the 30 knots of the ship stat

We don't have a conversion coefficient from realistic speed -> in game speed.

It's a ingame stats times the 5.5 coefficient.

We do

 

We have different scaling for size, ship speed and shell speed - usually those stats are actual size, speed and shell speed times coefficent.

 

Meaning that @mtm78 is absolutly correct. Speed and torpedo speed coefficent for submarines are extremly higher than any other ship. Double or triple what anything else has.

 

For example on French DDs - Mogador did actually achive 43,5 on trials. While Speedboost thing is iffy - it does not even come close to "speed buffed 3X"

[mtm78]

48 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Up to you, as I said way earlier. And while I can accept your decision, you might accept my decision. And since this is a discussion, it's obvious, that I explain my statments. I don't see, why that is an issue.

 

You can decide it's not game breaking all you want that is your right. It's is not your right to claim I'm lying, or that it's 'nonsense' or that I don't know what I am talking about, that right you do not have. 

 

Quote

Though what I can't agree with, if there discussion becomes personal, while ignoring the acutal statements. My person has nothing to do with a statement. When I say 1+1=2, then it doesn't matter, who I am. The statement is still correct.

 

Yes, so you see the issue I have with someone who seems to purposefully unable to understand simple facts and goes around with walls of text with totally irrelevant statements and demanding answers to things which have no relation to what I am saying. On purpose it feels, because you don't want to admit that people saying something negative about your love for this game turning into Steel Ocean. 

 

You're making it personal when you're attempting to act like you are unable to understand something entirely simple, just because you want to annoy the person you're 'discussing' this with. On some forums that would be considered an offense. 

 

48 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

And that's what is so annoying in forums, when people go for personal discrediting, instead of actual arugments.

You mean like constantly ignoring the actual issue and trying to burry it under walls of unrelated and totally irrelevant stuff, that kind of annoying? And there is no personal discrediting, you admitted you are a Steel Ocean sub main, and yes while this would have in the past caused a lot of downvotes because no one wanted sub players here trying to tell us we should put them in World of Warships this is only personally discrediting if you like me think Steel Ocean is a crap game and it's mechanics should have kept out of this great game. 

 

You won, be happy, don't keep on trying to get a reaction you can complain about with your charades. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

How you don't see the difference?

I see a difference between homing torpeods and non-homing. But the thing is, I see advantage, but also disadvantages.

I'm not a fan off these comments like "they are homing, so they are op" thing.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

It is strange how it seems BB's can't outplay DD unguided torps from long range, but should be able to do against sub torps from close range. Something doesn't compute here. DD that gets to 2 km from BB have taken a big risk. It's ok to be able to do a lot of damage. Sub staying untouchable at 2km has not taken the risk. See the difference? 

I played now subs in the ranked with the fast speed. Guess what, many torpedos missed the BBs, they only need to turn.

My current accuracy with torpedos is 27%, and well, they are homing ^^

 

My experience is, that cruisers seem to struggle to avoide them. Or generally, if a ship does a missplay of course

 

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Of course you can keep saying a BB can DCP incoming torpedoes. But that assumes he is not going to need it for HE spam from other ships.

That makes no sense at all. You use DCP for damage reduction. How does it matter, if that is a fire from a DD or cruiser, or reduced damage + flood immunity from a SS?

Maybe I'm not clear enough

Scenario 1

Cruiser and SS attacks BB. Cruiser spams HE. maybe gets a fire, maybe not. But Torpedos income, and he can't dodge, because potato or panic, so he DCP the cit-damage.

Torpedo dmg reduced, immune to floods and HE spam fires

 

Scenario 2

Cruiser and DD attacks. Cruiser spams HE. maybe gets a fire, maybe not. But Torpedos income, and he can't dodge, because potato or panic, and takes a flood. DCP the flood and maybe fires.

 

There are 2 enemies in both scenarios, and both can cause effects, that could need DCP. Where is the issue?

 

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Of course BB can try to outmaneuver the sub. After all sub is just as fast as he is (less on Georgia, much faster versus Colorado, Vermont & co.), turns in around 50-75% smaller circle, reacts to turns faster and has better acceleration. Such fun "just maneuver and sail to subs side".

Don't get the argument here, submarines are the slowest ships with the BBs in this game. Some BBs are slower, some are faster, so we can say, they are around the same speed.

Are BBs now fast ships? No. DDs are the larger threat against disengaging BBs. Subs struggle to reach them, especially if the BB is faster.

But then, being 1-3 knots faster makes no difference. The T6s have also only around 15 knots submerged. If he is surfaced, he can be shot.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

This really is your solution to some BB/CA not having ASW weapons to make it balanced against subs? 

Yes, because it's a very similar scenario like against DDs, though I assume DDs are harder to fight, because Submarines lack in mobility and flexibilty.

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Above numbers are pretty much maximum, but should you give idea of how stupid "just wait for dive capacity to end" really is.

And the maximum is very unlikely. In what scenario is no ASW ship available, and a submarine has full Div Cap? That must be a scenario, that is pointless anways.

Mostly a submarine loses divecap by random spottings, how the ping mechanic works, submarine hydro etc. If a T10 has too much, than it's a balancing issue of the DivCap, not of the ASW.

 

I don't agree, that all ships should get counter against Subs, but not against DDs.

 

The scenarios are very similar, in case a BB is alone against a DD or SS. In both cases they can stay invisible and try to hunter the BB down. But the thing is, submarines are not that good against BBs. Not saying, that subs can't hit them hard, but the homing works not very good against them.

 

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

So DD playing badly, or getting to difficult situation is all by his doing, but if sub get in similar bad situation it mush have "get out of jail card" because it would not be fair?

That is a pretty bad analogy, because the cases are different and I'm not sure, if you know, how the ASW planes work.

 

ASW planes drop bombs, those cause splash damage. Shells don't cause splash damage.

Submarines are quite slow, compared to other ships. DDs are quite fast, compared to other ships

 

So you have a weapon, that can hit easier (splash dmg) a slower target

vs

Shells, that need to hit accuratley vs a fast target

 

Do you notice something?

Huge splahs on slow targets? Easy aiming on easy targets

Pinpoint hitting on fast targets? "Difficult" aiming on difficult targets

 

That multiplies.

 

I already told it: You will have a submarine spotted. It has to be close, because the combat ranges are around 9-14 km. Submarine is close, and now, if all ships get ASW planes, that have no DCs. Then they will instantly all drop their ASW Planes on them. That is such easy kill.

 

But if a DD is spotted on 10-14 km, and ships shoot, is that always an easy kill? Well, I don't get always instantly killed, just because I got spotted. So I doubt that.

 

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

And which enemy sub we are talking about? If there is no enemy sub then sub can just go to operating depth, or even deep depth and he is pretty much safe.

That is a similar case of DD vs DD. If the own DD is bad, then BBs struggle, unless there is no Radar ship around.

 

Funny enough, you brought the point "But then we push the DD and he loses effectiveness. Well, you force a Sub to operating depth, then the sub is useless as well? He can't see there. Only hydro pings, but the hydro is not spotting, only highlighting (it spots down there only submarines).  But he also needs hydro, thats a consumable

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

And your problem is that BB 13 km away can harm sub, if that sub somehow gets spotted? 

Yes, submarines need to be close, because they don't have high ranges. It happens quitly easily

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Have you ever gotten hits to DD at 20+ km range when carrier spots enemy early in battle? Why DD being in danger is expected and counts to nothing, but subs should be free of counter play if someone spots him close to several enemy ships? Something doesn't compute here.

As I mentioned earlier, shells are different than ASW planes. On 13km it's easy to drop ASW planes. But hitting shells not. That's why there is such a difference...

You could also ask me, if I hit torpedos on a BB at 20km range and same for shells. Well shells I do hit quite often on 20km , torpedos less. But that doesn't matter, ASW, torpedos and shells are different armament types.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Or might it just be that ships that have ASW could keep what ever they have. 

Then you pick ships that have no ASW weapons and give then 1/4 to 1/2 of DD level depth charges.

That what "kinda" work, but I still think it's unfair. Also not saying, that this game is super historically accurate, but as far as I know, they don't give DCs on ships, they don't have those. But don't quote me on that. just my current knowledge.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Why go for "but then every BB could drop on me at 13 km" or "but then every BB would lose their ASW bombers" when you could just do minor correction to those who are totally left out?

Actually noticing ASW planes is not always that easy, but also they are quite fast, they just got a speed buff. While you set your rudder, almost the half time is over of the approach, if you noticed them late, you are probably already dropped.
My experience with ASW planes is, if the user is not predicting the course of the submarine correctly well, he will rather miss. There is not much space for the submarine to dodge those.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Would it be really game breaking that sub could not sail under a BB (or CA) for minutes without any fear?

Shouldn't there be some danger if sub manages to get sailed over by a BB? How bad such sub should be?

If a sub does that, then we are back for effectiveness. I don't understand, why it's so easy for a BB to push an invisible DD away and makes him "ineffective". But forcing a submarine for minutes to Maxium depth is effective for the sub.

 

Always when a ship forces me to dive like that, then it's a "crap, I'm useless now and can't help my team"  A DD still can spot, drop torps etc.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Thank you for asking. Salmon is doing 31 knots on surface at T8. So many DD's have only 2-4 knot advantage on her.

Also subs have DD level turning circles. Some bigger DD's even have 100-200m larger turning than DD's. 

Is that true? I can't check it. Though Salmon would be faster than the T10s, interesting.  Maybe it's an error by Wargaming

 

 

T6s. Both submarines 25 knots. ~15 knots submerged.

 

26 ships of 33 ships are faster. Only 2 ships are at 21 knots. But that are only 4 knots difference and only surfaced.

 

In case of T6s, they are at the bottom speed. Also for T10s, 30 Knots is BB speed level. Some BBs are faster, some are slower, some have that speed.
Are BBs fast ships in this game?

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

With their speed boost up Balao can do 33,35 underwater and U-2501 35,65 underwater. Slow? Really?

So, that's an interesting arguing. On the one had you are saying, that they are like 12 minutes under water. But on the other hand, they use a skill, that works only with depleted DivCap?  I wouldn't even think, that submarines actually take that skill. I don't

But then, T6 and T8 should be submerged actually slower. Also my explanation for that high speed is ,that with every tier, ships get more stats. The problem is, that submarines don't have a "sustain" stat, unless you don't buff them with huge amounts of HP. But there is no armor or anything, So speed is actually a defensive stat. That's what I could imagine.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

And what is this nonsense about "low range"? Germans subs have 9, 10 and 11 km range. US subs 11,5, 12,5 and 14 km range.

Half the DD's are jealous about those ranges and other half is equal.

DDs are low range, same as SS. Though DDs are more versatile here. They have low range up to high range (20km trops or mid range guns). That depends on the DD. But as a very generalized statement, I would count them to "low range",even if they have some high ranges.

 

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Yes, if Yamato starts from out of torp range and is sailing away.

 

Lets turn this around and give a BB all the advantages, except initial spotting.

 

Iowa is one of fastest BB's (33 knots, only Georgia or Frenchies with speed boost are faster). Heading away from a sub, so we do need to think about time it take to turn, bleed speed and regaining it. So this is "perfect BB escape" situation. Fastest BB on most suitable position.

 

Balao is at 4 km distance on periscope depth (2,2 km spot normally), and pings (spot  4 km) just a second too early (so not from 4,1 km), so he is seen by Iowa. Iowa starts to sail away to save himself.  

A right to left turn and torpdos might all miss without using DCP even.

 

 

 

Even a high speed Mutso can dodge easily. She turned right and all missed.

 

 

 

 

All missed.

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

Now tell what something like 21 knot Colorado can do?

I think the Mutsu example is okay enough? Though maybe it's my homing-skill ,that I turn guide them well enough ;D

 

2 hours ago, Gnomus said:

1. Subs are not slow. Only medium or fast DD's or fast cruisers have meaningful advantage on them.
2. Subs are maneuverable. Their turning circles are DD level and rudder times on par with bad DD or good CL/CA.
3. Their torpedoes are as good as Swedish DD torps. Nothing to shame there.
4. They can shoot torps as non-homing avoiding all the "but homing has disadvantages too" thigs. If they want they can use homing with big bonuses.
5. They have good camo, but lose spotting when going below.
6. They are relatively safe underwater, even when spotted. ASW planes can touch them, DD's and CL's need to get over them to do harm (good luck there if sub didn't overextend or was not last alive).
7. Their diving capacity go from 6 minutes + 20 seconds (or 6,6 minutes + 60/108 seconds + 20 seconds) to 10,3 minutes + 60/108 seconds + 20 seconds on T10. Good luck waiting for sub to come to surface, while you are taking torps from the said sub and fire from other enemies. 

1. Still on the slower side, BB speeds, mostly. Especially in the case of T6. This shitty speed skill, then a BB can also take the shitty speed skill, since we assume, that the submarine is on maxium depth for being save, the BB will be invisible and very fast.
2. Maneuverbility takes also speed into account. At least it's what WG is defining it. And that's what I'm takling about. They are low range, slow speed -> Inflexbile. They don't have 20km ranges, they don't have 40 knots or higher.
3. Don't say, they are bad, just not saying, they are broken op and they have disadvantages.
4. Non-homing has the diadvanatge of having only tight spread but also reduced damage. (to be more correct: They don't have increased dmg)
5. Yes, that's a mechanic I like, the play with the concealment. And I like the idea of good concealment on periscope depth and with ping 4km, that gives avery spicy gameplay, when the submarine pings without being away of a DD. Overall the concealment is good, but some DDs can play around it. Beside that, the concealment gets better for surface ships, when submerged.
6. Depends. Submarines can also easily get killed. So really depends. Similar to a smoke for a DD. DDs can get killed there, or not even get touched
7. Happend to me, also happend to other subs. I almost won a 1vs4 vs two submarines, a DD and cruiser I guess. Both enemy subs had no DivCap, that was my advantage

Watch that replay, please, I did a huge mistake, but when I realize, I was just "[edited]it, hope it won't happend" when I die

 

Here the replay:

4 hours ago, Pikkozoikum said:

20210820_163918_PGSS106-U-69_13_OC_new_dawn.wowsreplay

 that was a fun match, and that missplay at the end, damn, I didn't watch xD

 

Also, it seems that the homing torps are pretty strong against cruisers. Or my cruiser enemies were just bad. Hard to tell. But against BBs, it's very hard to hit them, unless they fxck it up

Watch it slow, there are also funny torpedo beats

And the end - I was about to hit the DD, in case you missed that, but I derped

 

ps: I 'm mostly not complaining, it's rather discussing. There are only a few things I complain about, like the choice how they decided about the aircrafts on the Carriers (J5N on Haku ), or the power armor on russian ships

[Pikkozoikum]

1 hour ago, mariouus said:

We do

 

We have different scaling for size, ship speed and shell speed - usually those stats are actual size, speed and shell speed times coefficent.

 

Meaning that @mtm78 is absolutly correct. Speed and torpedo speed coefficent for submarines are extremly higher than any other ship. Double or triple what anything else has.

 

For example on French DDs - Mogador did actually achive 43,5 on trials. While Speedboost thing is iffy - it does not even come close to "speed buffed 3X"

No, you just calculate a factor. You can do that, but that's not the ingame coefficient.

 

 

Read number 4

Quote

The Q&A by BadPreacher and Sub_Octavian dated September 13

 

Source: http://forum.worldofwarships.ru/index.php?/topic/33727-%d0%be%d1%82%d0%b2%d0%b5%d1%82%d1%8b-%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%b7%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%b1%d0%be%d1%82%d1%87%d0%b8%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2/page__st__160#topmost

 

[...]

---

Q: I heard that the ships move five times the real speed and the shells fly twice as fast. Have you increased the speed, or shrunk the distances? How does doubling the speed of shells influence their ballistics?
A: Let me explain this in some detail.
1. There are two types of distance measures in the game, the ship meter (relevant to the ships) and the ballistic meter (relevant to the shells in flight).
2. One ship meter equals two shell meters, which means that the ships are twice their real size.
3. The ballistics trajectories are computed with maximum realism, but are flattened to make tracing shots and aiming easier.
4. The speeds of ships, torpedoes and planes are increased by a factor 5.22 relative the ballistic meter.
5. The speeds of shell are increased by a factor 2.61 relative to the ballistic meter.
6. The detonators on the AP shells are modeled based on gameplay considerations.

 

You will see, that your Yamato moves 27 knots. But physically it moves ~3.5 faster of these 27 knots

You will see, that your Balao moves ~30 knots, but physicall it moves ~3.5 faster of these 30 knots

 

That is the coefficient, that is applied on all ships, when you go into a battle.

 

I'm very sure, that in this game is no calculation, that has in the game code:  [historically, realistic speed] x [ship specific coefficient]

 

If you say, that is the case, please show me a source, where it is shown in the code, or a developer says that. Aside, that a developer already said, that there is a 5.22 factor relative the baliistic meter.

[mariouus]

9 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

 

Do you actually read what you write - or you just write?

 

Do you actually consider yourself smart enought do place an Argument? I am not that certan about - I see alot of claims from you - but never an argument.

 

So provide an argument and we can discuss something. At the moment you are providing personal opinion - and factually fantastic as such.

 

The 5,5 is litterally from your own claim -unlike you -  I actually knew that correct was 5,2. But the difference is somewaht irrelavent.

 

Nor XXI nor Baloa achived anywhere around 30.knots. Like I sayed - and completly factually I might add. Fleet Snorkel Conversion - USS Sabalo (what we have in tier X actually - its not any of the Guppys and not USS Baloa) had maximum submerged speed of 9.knots and XXI had  around 17.knots. Both are doing around 30 and over 30.knots currently. This literally and absolutly factually means that Coefficent for them is not 5,2 or 5,5 - it is 10 or 17. The fact that they have 30.knots in game is irrelavent - they did not come even close in reality - so they are not scailable into game. 

 

Yamato had 27 times coefficent. Sabalo should have 9 times coefficent, XXI should have 17 times coefficent. 

.

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

9 minutes ago, mariouus said:

Do you actually read what you write - or you just write?

Should be quite easily to understand. But I can rephrase something, if someting is not clear.

 

9 minutes ago, mariouus said:

an Argument

Statement: There is one speed coeffiecient in this game code for all ships.

Evidence: Q&A with S_O (5.22 factor)

 

Statement: The higher speed on submarines is not part in the coefficient. It's a ship stat. A value of the ship itself.

Evidence: Look in the port, there is that stat, like all the other ship stats. But not the coeffiecent included. That stat is set around 30 knots for Balao.

 

That are two arguments. I told you those earlier. If you ignore arguments and say, "there are none". Then I can't discuss with you.

 

14 minutes ago, mariouus said:

At the moment you are providing personal opinion - and factually fantastic as such.

Now I'm actually wondering, if I get trolled xD

I was literally mentioning the facts (even though I picked the wrong number), while you came up with selfmade calculations for the factor for realistic speed to ingame speed.

Just because you calculated the difference, the factor, doesn't mean, that we have that calculation in the game code. That's not a fact.

But how is it a personal opinion, when I say, that the 5.22 is the coefficient in WoWS? I quoted it, that is not my opinion

 

Otherwise

@YabbaCoe could you get us the explanation, how the speed is set in the game? Has a submarine like balao 30 knots in the game code. or is there a calculation behind it about [Balaos historically speed] x [Balance factor] = 30 knots?

 

 

12 minutes ago, mariouus said:

The 5,5 is litterally from your own claim -unlike you -  I actually knew that correct was 5,2. But the difference is somewaht irrelavent.

Not a claim, a fact. It's literally said by the Devs, just read it. The number doesn't even matter, my statement was about, that there is a specific coefficient and not a cofficient for every single ship.

 

27 minutes ago, mariouus said:

Nor XXI nor Baloa achived anywhere around 30.knots. Like I sayed - and completly factually I might add. Fleet Snorkel Conversion - USS Sabalo (what we have in tier X actually - its not any of the Guppys and not USS Baloa) had maximum submerged speed of 9.knots and XXI had  around 17.knots. Both are doing around 30 and over 30.knots currently. This literally and absolutly factually means that Coefficent for them is not 5,2 or 5,5 - it is 10 or 17. The fact that they have 30.knots in game is irrelavent - they did not come even close in reality - so they are not scailable into game. 

 

Yamato had 27 times coefficent. Sabalo should have 9 times coefficent, XXI should have 17 times coefficent. 

This has nothing to do with the discussion. It doesn't matter, what speed they head irl.  It's about:

 

5 hours ago, mtm78 said:

5 hours ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The Coefficient is for all the same

Except it is not.

 

Are you saying, that the 5.22 is not the same for all ships, like the Devs said? Can you proof that? My proof is the Q&A and some common sense.

 

As I said, you can caculate your own personal factor in your own calculation with the 5.22 coefficient, the realistic speed and the ship stat. But that is not the Coefficient in the game in this game code.

I highly doubt, that they have that cacluation and your calculated factor as "speed coeffcient" in the programm code.

 

I'm not even sure, if you can call a coefficient coefficient, when it's variable. I'm not a mathematic

 

[mtm78]

3 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Otherwise

@YabbaCoe could you get us the explanation, how the speed is set in the game? Has a submarine like balao 30 knots in the game code. or is there a calculation behind it about [Balaos historically speed] x [Balance factor] = 30 knots?

Obvious disingenuous question. 

 

The real question is:

Quote

Does Balao go 30kts in the game?

 

If the answer is yes, it's not using the same time compression coefficient as the other classes. And WG already confirmed this themselves by saying their speeds are not realistic 'for balance sake' 

 

6 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Are you saying, that the 5.22 is not the same for all ships, like the Devs said? Can you proof that? My proof is the Q&A and some common sense.

Yes, obviously that comment was made before submarines were a public subject so they were not taken into account in the answer 

6 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

and some common sense.

x for doubt

 

[mariouus]

15 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Should be quite easily to understand. But I can rephrase something, if someting is not clear.

Really?

15 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

I was literally mentioning the facts (even though I picked the wrong number), while you came up with selfmade calculations for the factor for realistic speed to ingame speed.

Did I come up with selfmaid calculation? I even sayed the ship "USS Balao" actually is. It is a 9.knot submerged ship. If it goes faster than 9.knots times 5.2 - it is not scalable (or 5.5- does not matter).And it really goes faster- am I wrong? It is not my problem WG cocked up again. It is not GUPPY - it does not have GUPPY bow. If it would be GUPPY conversion - it would be scalable do German Sub, but still roughtly 2x non scalable to other ships. And I would be still right.

 

If you look at all my "claims". You can see that they are either factual - or quotable (in case what you sayed). All of this combined is called "an argument". 

 

Most glaring indication of that something does not fit into the game - is that when it is not scalable. Proof me wrong. We even have WG statment that subs just does not fit - this statement is proofed by facts that they just does not scale into- like everything else.

 

You can actually see that I did not give any of "my opinion". I took completly factual approach.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

12 hours ago, mtm78 said:

Stop acting like you're dumb, I will start to assume you're being a troll otherwise. 

• he's not acting...
• noticing he's trolling took you astoundingly long... considering he's been doing it for years... at least since when defending the CV reeeework against all facts

[admiraldelorin]

14 hours ago, Gvozdika said:

To the fans of subs - all 2 of you. Allow me to put to you a scenario that illustrates the absurdity of submarines in WOWS. Let us say I'm going to introduce to the game a new special DD. 

 

- It is going to be roughly twice as fast as historically - so a speed of 80 knots. 

 

- It can launch guided ship to ship missiles that will account for lead and track their targets through their flightpath. These missiles will also be fast and usually citadel their targets while having a reasonably rapid reload.

 

- At a press of a button it will be immune to detection aside from proximity spotting - even then only other special DDs will be able to see it. 

 

- Despite being a surface ship it will be immune to radar detection at a press of a button - because reasons. 

 

- 2/3 of the time it will be invulnerable to most of the enemy team. Only a select few ships will have means of shooting it even when it is spotted and sat right in front of them. Even CVs (that great mollycoddled class). 

 

- It will retain the concealment values of a small DD and the incredibly small target silhouette.

 

- It cannot however cap while in it 'invulnerable state - so it'll be fine.

 

- The ship will be balanced by WGs balancing department - with a view to encouraging as many sales as possible early on.

 

Answer me this. Would you be happy with ships like that being added to the game? Can you possibly see some of the issues that will occur as a result?

Because THAT is precisely what you are asking for when it comes to subs. 

 

You then have the temerity to wonder why people are dead set against the idea...

 

You know all of this..  why are you still here..  why don't you make your own game?   With all due respect I am getting pretty much what i expected and i find it as advertised.. including the toxic chat in any game mode not CB or training.  and if no guided missile frigates what do you think is the ship class  going to be introduced in lets say  September 2027...  And i am not a lawyer, but on my terms, by the legally binding documents I got what I payed for.  

What goes for DD, Subs and CV's goes even more for BB's. If realistic they would all have to  stay in port.. swamped by flights of 70 - planes in each CV attack. killed by 2 torps from any  DD..  and be lit up by a 10 : 1 ratio against CC 's  so the joke is on the early adopters who for what ever phantom  reason thought they were getting a MB (tm) Battleship derivative.. Should have looked at WOT before ever thinking that..  All I see is that any ship not to far out of the tier range can end up in the winning team in any random battle and might influence the outcome for 1/12th.  As a BB player you should be glad that the submarine  does not need to do that much damage to get on the score board, leaves more points on the table for you. 

"Realistic" and "Arcade" are fluent, an  "Arcade" game in my world is found in some Arcade. Yes those still exist..  "Realistic" as in  RL physically is impossible.. for various reasons not the least due to the flat screen and the speed of light. 
It's a game, pieces are modeled after real life (even if only existed on a a serviette in a Soviet design bureau)  and the movement of pieces is a bit more complex then in chess. Get over it.

If we are only 2 i'm sure the revenue stream will dry up, and the game will change.. but since i 'm paying for 2...   good luck on that..   

[Bear__Necessities]

People who want subs don't care about them being balanced. They just want an easy click damage button that's hard to fight back on fair term with. They are the under water version of the CV's. Everything else suck on the surface is just food and fodder for them. 

[_Caesar_Imperator_]

Oops, Pikkozoikum tries to keep the atmosphere high for the submarines. It worked well for him in other games too, so it has to fit WoWS as well. Be careful, it only gets really bad when he throws tables around.

[Axilian_1]

I wish we had a text box with the post match survey :(

 

SO I CAN TELL WG JUST HOW MUCH I HATE SUBS and what I think of the idiots that thought they worked

[mtm78]

8 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

• he's not acting...
• noticing he's trolling took you astoundingly long... considering he's been doing it for years... at least since when defending the CV reeeework against all facts

 

It's not that I didn't know, I been here longer then today as well remember, it's hard to pin him down on it. All he wants is walls of text about things which aren't related, ask questions which aren't relevant just because he doesn't want this discussion to be about the fact that immersion factor is totally gone when talking about submarines in this game. It just will not work in pvp random battles, it would work in pvp convoy mode with a lot of changes to make them more akin to real life scenario/performance but then you're looking at extending the 20m battle timer and WG doesn't think that would attract enough players to sell pixel submarines to. It would 100% work in any PVE setting, both defending against and attacking submarines like with uhm that convoy mode people been telling uncle WeeGee about for uhm since the game was in early testing. 

 

8 hours ago, admiraldelorin said:

<snip> I got what I payed for.  

12 posts, hidden profile. I can't check but I assume you're not alpha/beta/weekend tester or even one which been around since 'release' since WG been actually advertising the game as semi realistic ( just listen to the YT video sponsorship 'commercials', or the one's they aired on TV now and then in different countries ), and they EXPLICTLY PROMISED there would be no submarines. 

 

That's the game I spend countless hours on, the game I spend quite some money on and the game I would like to play even now. Sadly that game has been replaced with a different game. 

 

I am not talking about gradual changes to a game which happen naturally, like power creep aimed at making you buy new premiums every now and then, or even reworking an existing class because to many bad players don't have the will or ability to not stay bad players with them so they give them a new class which has assured first strike capability so even the worst of the worst doesn't feel that useless, give them automated consumables because they are so incredibly bad they can't manage them on their own, and they can't even sail their ships themselves. 

 

But now DD's and light cruisers are expected to do EVERYTHING they already had to do, and also protect the BB's from submarines? 

 

Even if I would reinstall that %$%$@^ 'game' I would ignore any submarine on the enemy team, because I did not BUY my premium destroyers to go after WG's fantasy version of nuclear submarines during WWII. But that's probably not going to happen, it would be to heartbreaking to see what the lies from this company have done to a game I once loved. Instead, if they really will push to add submarines to random battles, I will be contacting Dutch lawyers to look into a court case demanding refunds for all my premium ships after which WG can close my account all they want. 

[Pukovnik7]

The only thing I can say about submarines:

 

[Sprockett]

46 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

 

Even if I would reinstall that %$%$@^ 'game' I would ignore any submarine on the enemy team, because I did not BUY my premium destroyers to go after WG's fantasy version of nuclear submarines during WWII. But that's probably not going to happen, it would be to heartbreaking to see what the lies from this company have done to a game I once loved. Instead, if they really will push to add submarines to random battles, I will be contacting Dutch lawyers to look into a court case demanding refunds for all my premium ships after which WG can close my account all they want. 

or you could be selling your not inconsiderable fleet to a Whale and have a whale of a time on the proceeds.... https://www.playerauctions.com/world-of-warships-account/   a lovely go F^^@ yourself

[mtm78]

6 hours ago, Sprockett said:

or you could be selling your not inconsiderable fleet to a Whale and have a whale of a time on the proceeds....<snip< a lovely go F^^@ yourself

 

Yeah but while that would probably ( if all legit and all would work out ) just compensate myself and not do anything else. 

 

If WG changes their game to an extent a court would force them to reimburse people who bought in game content under false pretenses well that's a whole different kind of story then, and I would prefer that route above the other. I wouldn't want to fight evil with evil, I rather have a judge tell me if these business practices are actually legit or not. 

[General_Alexus]

1 hour ago, Bear__Necessities said:

People who want subs don't care about them being balanced. They just want an easy click damage button that's hard to fight back on fair term with. They are the under water version of the CV's. Everything else suck on the surface is just food and fodder for them. 

You just decribed the BB population perfectly.