An alternative submarine mechanics design for WoWs

[Figment]

So taken from a number of posts, what I'd do with submarines to make them fit into WoWs better. I'd do a major overhaul of the sub mechanics that Wargaming came up with to make them both fairer, more diverse and more fun.

Role definition (scouting, flanking and assassination)

The sub role overlaps a lot with that of DDs, just that they're much worse at capping due to their fragility when surfaced, can't fire over any terrain and typically have much worse AA. However, they have some positioning advantages as they could sneak by or up really close before engaging, or scout targets that would be hard to scout with DDs and have a different means of escape and damage mitigation.

 

Spotting wise, subs can in principle go where DDs cannot go. If they can for instance make a move to bypass some ships and then spot or attack radar or other camping cruisers from certain positions a DD cannot easily reach, then that's an USP for them. With similar speeds to DDs (as is) and lowered detection range and submerging management play, this could be a viable and fun stealth gameplay addition. If you make subs invulnerable to radar (even if just at periscope depth), that's an additional advantage over, or useful alternative to, DD spotting in high tier matches. Your goal is to get as close as possible to the enemy, outflank them and strike, then try to survive any counterattack.

 

Starting locations:

Depending on map size, ~2.5km - 5km ahead of current DDs, halfway between the current starting positions (so more in between A-B or B-C on most maps, or higher up the sides of concentric ring maps). This should reduce the time to target a bit, but also provide a more viable and unpredictable choice where to go (center or flank). Slight reduction in travel time means sooner in action.

 

What to do with ping?: mainly navigation

The current ping mechanism is very flawed IMO and a separate design issue on its own that should not be conflated with submarine viability. IMO its frequency of use for homing torpedoes is both far too high as is to be fair against the temporary repair skill one has and in used for the wrong purpose (homing torpedoes, rather than distance and position gauging and navigation). The combination with citadelling ships is more than a little off and should have no relation to that. It should not be required for manual torping either. I could however, see pinging a ship required to attain the torpedo lead indicator.

 

Personally I think pings should be used primarily while at max depth to check for surface ships in particular directions, reveal the terrain ahead under water and be used for sub to sub combat (since elevation is an issue, some limited angle homing torps would be a good thing for sub to sub combat, but not per se for sub to ship combat). In that case, using a ping would not be necessary in sub to surface ship combat as this would be resolved at periscope depth and on the surface. But, it would be required to determine if it is save-ish to pop up again and give RPF-like info to surface ships in its direct vicinity, where one ping doesn't provide accurate info to either side, but receiving more frequent pings in a row and/or within a certain distance would increasingly accurately tell where they are. This could look like this: the first ping provides a range and wide vector, a second ping a narrower vector and a third ping show a targeting indicator over the ship. If the sub is within a certain range of the pinged ship(s), it would increasingly reveal its own location in the same way to enemy ships however.

 

Torpedo changes:

• Default torpedoes are fired at surface vessels manually, fire and forget, straight line.
• Same range of torpedo speeds as for DDs.
• Torpedo range varies between of ~4.5km to ~10.5km depending on tier, nation and ship and other stats like stealth capabilities etc.
• Reload times:
  • Torpedoes would be not reload set by set in subsequent order, but independently and simultaneously.
  • Reload times would be a bit longer to compensate for increased average damage per torpedo (though lowered maximum damage compared to citadels and keeping torpedo mitigation in mind)
  • This forces hit and run, rather than hit hit hit and move to next target as is possible today at times.
• Between torpedoes of the same tier, in general the longer the range, the lower the payload. Think difference between Skane's and Mahan's torpedoes (up to about 40% difference).
• Special torpedoes may exist, but their used should be conditional and limited:
  • Zig-zag torpedoes
    • Alternate mode to straight fire for some nation subs (could be given to some cruisers and DDs too)
    • Follow standard patterns
    • Can set it to zig or zag first by right clicking and cycling through the modes
  • Homing torpedoes
    • Used in sub-to-sub warfare by all nations to compensate for elevation changes and increased difficulty for distance determination
      • Homing torpedo steering angles are ~80% reduced with what they are now. Initial aim must be pretty accurate.
      • Acoustic homing torpedoes target the propellor of a ship at higher speeds (>=50%) and engine of a ship at lower speeds (<50%)
      • Magnetic homing torpedoes just target the nearest part of the ship (may still hit elsewhere due to limited steering)
    • Some (!) nations might have these torps as alternate mode to fire at surface ships, at both a significant cost of refire rate, or as limited consumeables and at a damage reduction (reasoning would be lower payload to make room for torpedo navigation system)
  • Deepwater torpedoes
    • Some nation subs can load deepwater torpedoes instead of regular torpedoes.
      • Deepwater torps can't hit DDs
      • Optional design:
        • periscope depth of a ship determines if they are regular or deepwater torpedoes, so less HE damage, but can't hit DDs from periscope depth
        • surface = always regular torpedoes
• A ship's torpedo belt is actually useful in preventing torpedo damage. Torpedoes are thus best aimed at bow or stern unless a ship has no torpedo belt.

 

ASW and torpedo countermeasures and prevention of always-submerged-when-it-matters:

• Depth charges. Same as now. Every vessel that had it should have it.
  • Maybe balance depth charges between nations in terms of number, spread and damage a bit better.
• HE damage up to about 1.5x-2x periscope depth, depending on shell caliber. BBs can thus use HE deeper than most cruisers and DDs.
• Hydroacoustic search detection radius:
  • Surfaced ships as per usual
  • Periscope depth -30% range
  • Maximum depth -60% range
  • Deep dive: -100% range, but as indicated below, deep diving may cause flooding(s). So forcing a sub to evade hydro and depth charges might still result in (significant) damage to the sub.
• Some (non-ASW in particular) ships could get a sonic decoy for defense purposes to throw off homing torpedoes
• New ship hull upgrade for some older BBs: anti-torpedo netting. Costs ship speed, but reduces the damage of torpedoes (can be destroyed like secondaries?)
• Means of forcing subs to surface or sinking them:
  • Anxiety of being detected increases oxygen usage by the crew by 15-25%, forcing the sub captain to pop up sooner or die through suffocation. Basically what happens now. So even if power suffices to stay under, this might be an issue.
  • Module damage:
    • Broken battery modules instantly reduce available power for diving by a set percentage of the remaining dive time (assuming batteries drain equally). Percentage depends on the amount of batteries on board.
    • Stuck elevator (forces up to surface, levelling or even uncontrolled deep dive depending on angle at time of damage) - requires ballast tank expulsion to safe from sinking and risking floods.
    • Flooding - Depending on amount of compartiments flooded: reduced surfacing rate, increased diving rate
    • Fire - Fires on subs reduce oxygen levels (increase oxygen usage by 30%)
    • Engine damage - reduced battery recharge rate at surface and periscope depth
    • Snorkel damage - reduced air intake rate, switch to electric power
• More limited dive time
  • Reduction from 6 minutes diving time to 2-4 minutes, depending on tier. Must make more strategic use of periscope depth and surfacing.
  • Difference in dive time on the basis of oxygen and power.
  • See below for recharge rates at surface and periscope depth. Note: Would be faster than today due to reduced dive time as you run out more quickly.

 

Diving limiters: oxygen and power (and hp)

First off, I'd have two limiters on diving: power and oxygen. If either runs out, the sub would be considered sunk and not just forced to the surface. So there'd be three ways to kill a sub: running out of hp, oxygen or power. Sitting on top of a sub could thus be a way to kill 'm off if the sub captain didn't manage their oxygen and power levels, even for non-ASW ships. HP wise nothing would change. The amounts of HP are fine as is IMO: they're very fragile units with a large striking capability.

 

(Dis)advantages of various depths:

NB: values are open to balancing, indicative values only.

 

Surfaced:

++ Optimal (surface) scouting range: full 360° surface vision, maximum detecting range (torpedo range +30%, or min. 8km), ~2.5km sub-surface hydrophone range

++ Improved recharging of battery and oxygen (+30-50% recharge speed based on the nation).

+ Can use secondaries and AA

+ For most ships: optimal speed

+ Can effectively fire torpedoes at surface ships

+ Can move camera underwater for anti-sub warfare

+ Can cap/contest zones

+ Diesel engine active (batteries recharge)

- Could be detected by radar (though perhaps shorter than other ships due to limited sillhouette)

- Can't use all consumeables

- Worst detection range (~3.8km at lowest tiers up to ~5.8km at higher tiers)

-- Worst air detection range (~2km at lowest tiers up to ~3km at higher tiers)

 

Periscope depth:

+ (Surface) scouting range is equal to maximum torpedo range, or the minimum range of 6km. Information is shared with allies.

+ Reduced detection range (~2.5km at lower tiers up to ~3km at higher tiers)

+ Reduced air detection range (~1.5km at lowest tiers up to ~2km at higher tiers) - with AA off, of course.

+ Reduced HE damage (Depending on ship may have varying periscope depths and thus varying HE mitigation at this level)

+ Can effectively fire torpedoes at surface ships
+ Can use some defensive consumeables

+ Can move camera underwater for anti-sub warfare

+ Can't be detected by radar

+ With snorkel: diesel engine active: batteries recharge and oxygen levels recharge

- Usualy slower speed

- Can't cap/contest zones

- If no snorkel or snorkel damaged, batteries drain, air drains

- Reduced situational awareness: ~2.5km 360° from hydrophone, but 120° vision in the direction you're pointing the camera. Turn camera to get situational awareness for other directions.

- Can't use secondaries or AA

 

Diving depth:

++ Can use all defensive consumeables

+ Automatically switches to anti-submarine torpedoes when a submarine is targeted upon launch (have minor vertical homing-in to make hitting possible) - note: torpedoes are fire and forget

+ Optimal camera for anti-sub warfare

+ RPF skill would still show nearest enemy unit(s).

- Can't cap/contest zones

-- Only hydrophone/active ping vision resulting in severely reduced scouting ranges: ~2.5km around your ship

-- No information sharing with allies until resurfaced or periscope depth is reached - only killed enemies and allied subs are communicated to the team as usual

-- Map shows only last known positions and actively scouted ships.

-- Can't effectively target surface ships due to torp elevation angle

 

Consumables:

- Blow air tanks (infinite use, recharges at surface (fast) or snorkle depth (slow)); for emergency dives (at the cost of a significant percentage of oxygen and a little power and thus diving time).

- Blow ballast tanks (infinite use, recharges at snorkle depth or max depth); for emergency surfacing (at the cost of air tanks and a little power and thus charging for the next diving time would take longer)

- Fake death (limited use (1), additional or more effective depending on captain skills); which could only be employed when taking damage in the 10s before, which would leave an oil spill on the surface and leave the sub undetectable even by hydro for a minute as long as it remains at max depth.

- Go silent; temporarily reduce underwater base detection range by 50%, reduces max speed by 50%. Reduces if not stops homing effect on sub-to-sub torpedoes fired by other submarines at you.

- Engine boost; Same as normal, more effective for most ships on the surface. Reduces power faster when used under water.

- Emergency Pumps; Restores damage taken from flooding specifically.

- Deep dive; Temporarily increases max depth out of depth charge range, the player loses control of diving depth and automatically dives the ship and eventually brings it back to max level (as long as elevator rudder is repaired). During deep dive, floodings may arbitrarily occur. Say every 5 seconds of deep dive a flooding check is done. Up to three or four simultaneous floodings may occur. Captain skills could for instance reduce the chance of flooding and/or the frequency of checks during deep dive.

- Decoy buoy (limited use (2-3), additional depending on captain skills), for a limited time creates an alternative blip in the area with your name and hp over it for enemies to chase. Is launched from a forward torpedo tube, so if you want to use this may not want to launch after you've been detected, but in expectation of being detected, or launching it in advance to confuse an enemy and let them show broadside.

- Magnetic mine deployment (limited use (3-5, additional depending on captain skills); Deploys a mine from a surfaced submarine that engages enemy ships trying to pass by it within a short distance. Limited detection range (1km, 1.5km with vigilance), limited drift activation range (250m). Activates 15s after deployment. Deals high damage if an enemy ship hits it. Can be deactivated by friendlies, including the own sub through friendly fire. Relatively short reload time.

 

Other ship settings:

- AA / secondaries on/off (note: any secondaries should actually work)

- Switch between Active Ping/Passive hydrophone - basically, "auto-ping" on/off. Active ping would automatically ping for you, increasing detection range of environment and enemy ships by +200% , but also risk disclosing your location over time. With this setting off, the slower you move the larger your situational awareness (particularly useful at max depth). 100% speed = base detection range of 2.5km (+0%). 50% speed is +50% detection range, 25% speed = +100% detection range.

 

Also, potential special sub rule for wins: for a point score win, any last player on a team must be surfaced when the timer runs out.

[Nibenay78]

I am sure WG forum users are busy noting down good suggestions. 

 

Or wait.. 

[Figment]

Just now, Nibenay78 said:

I am sure WG forum users are busy noting down good suggestions. 

 

Or wait.. 

Oh I'm sure they'll just post their prejudiced black and white and exagerated hyperbolic views and strawmans based on what they've (not) seen in game so far without any nuance whatsoever and what they want you to actually have said rather than what you proposed, then get angry when their views are pointed out as being biased and based on irrelevant knowledge and experience as per usual due to low emphatic and creative abilities and no capacity for self-critique. :)

 

 

What can you do. This is the way.

[JohnMac79]

Are you saying the current version of subs are not fun?

 

 

[Figment]

7 minutes ago, JohnMac79 said:

Are you saying the current version of subs are not fun?

Mebbe.

 

[Gvozdika]

All very good - but WG don't like effort. Some of your ideas would require effort and this simply will not do. 

 

I also note the lack of words 'loot' 'box 'random' 'bundle' 'whale' in your pitch - so I can guarantee that no WG staff member will read beyond the first sentence.

 

Joking aside - just look at how many adaptations, additional functions and mechanics you propose - just to make subs vaguely playable or balanced? Does this not suggest that the game REALLY isn't designed for them in the first place? 

 

To illustrate - I *could* try to modify my car to fly at tremendous cost and countless hours of work. I would probably ruin the car in the process - making it worse in every way - and the end result still wouldn't work. It was never designed for it and no amount of farting around with duct tape and plywood will change that. I argue that WOWS and submarines is no different. 

[Figment]

5 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

 

Joking aside - just look at how many adaptations, additional functions and mechanics you propose - just to make subs vaguely playable or balanced? Does this not suggest that the game REALLY isn't designed for them in the first place? 
 

Most of it exists as code fir various ships or is changing variables. So simple to code. New art is minimal. Rule checks minimal and simple.

Quote

To illustrate - I *could* try to modify my car to fly at tremendous cost and countless hours of work. I would probably ruin the car in the process - making it worse in every way - and the end result still wouldn't work. It was never designed for it and no amount of farting around with duct tape and plywood will change that. I argue that WOWS and submarines is no different. 

Good thing subs don’t fly then.

[Peffers]

27 minutes ago, Figment said:

Most of it exists as code fir various ships or is changing variables. So simple to code. New art is minimal. Rule checks minimal and simple.

 

You may think that but WG often run into "technical limitations" even with the most simple, like adding a ship to the armoury.

 

It is sad because you have some good ideas that would work in a sub orientated game rather than fleet action.

[Camperdown]

54 minutes ago, Figment said:

 

Good thing subs don’t fly then.

Not yet.

They need a substantial buff to be viable 

[Nibenay78]

39 minutes ago, Camperdown said:

Not yet.

They need a substantial buff to be viable 

Not that substantial.... just change the graphics and hitbox of a FDG squadron and tada... but now with homing torpedoes

[Ze_Reckless]

2 hours ago, Figment said:

Good thing subs don’t fly then.

You sure? I'm not an IT guy but the easiest way to implement subs looks like: take flying mechanics from planes, add a minus to the z-axis and you're done.

 

This game isn't about fun. It's supposed to be playable enough so they attract X amount of payers (no, there is no L missing) and have Y number of premium sub candidates to sell. Your ideas are useless to them.

[CptBarney]

Too be fair even if the community wanted this and agree with 100%, peegee would still bin it or if your lucky maybe take segments from it. Shame as this looks pretty good as well, i really do like the effort put into this really.

 

And thats my problem, as much as i would like to give suggestions or ideas out as well thought as these i know they will just ignore them.

[Nibenay78]

3 hours ago, Figment said:

What can you do. This is the way.

This is just a Figment of your imagination...

[King_Of_The_Potatoes]

The best thing WG can do with Subs atm is.

 

 

 

 

[invicta2012]

3 hours ago, Figment said:

What to do with ping?: mainly navigation

The current ping mechanism is very flawed IMO and a separate design issue on its own that should not be conflated with submarine viability. IMO its frequency of use for homing torpedoes is both far too high as is to be fair against the temporary repair skill one has and in used for the wrong purpose (homing torpedoes, rather than distance and position gauging and navigation). The combination with citadelling ships is more than a little off and should have no relation to that. It should not be required for manual torping either. I could however, see pinging a ship required to attain the torpedo lead indicator.

 

Personally I think pings should be used primarily while at max depth to check for surface ships in particular directions, reveal the terrain ahead under water and be used for sub to sub combat (since elevation is an issue, some limited angle homing torps would be a good thing for sub to sub combat, but not per se for sub to ship combat). In that case, using a ping would not be necessary in sub to surface ship combat as this would be resolved at periscope depth and on the surface. But, it would be required to determine if it is save-ish to pop up again and give RPF-like info to surface ships in its direct vicinity, where one ping doesn't provide accurate info to either side, but receiving more frequent pings in a row and/or within a certain distance would increasingly accurately tell where they are. This could look like this: the first ping provides a range and wide vector, a second ping a narrower vector and a third ping show a targeting indicator over the ship. If the sub is within a certain range of the pinged ship(s), it would increasingly reveal its own location in the same way to enemy ships however.

The main thing wrong with the current ping mechanic is that a) the pings last too long, b) the Repair Party/cancel mechanic is stupid, c) they enable you to direct torpedoes at any ship you can ping within range, after launch. Which is just silly. Ping/sonar lock should last 25 seconds not 30,  defending players should be able to mitigate by some means other than RP,  and you should only be able to guide torpedoes to the target which was sonar-locked/pinged at the time you fired them. None of this speculative torp firing and changing targets halfway through.

 

Torpedoes should also have a depth setting meter (this is realistic). This would allow sub vs sub play to become more dramatic and skill based - enabling a player attacking an enemy sub to set a vertical torpedo spread across several depths, rather than the current farrago of trying to match your depth against the depth of the submarine you're firing at. This also opens up possibilities for variable torp detection ranges depending on running depth (5m would be difficult to BBs to spot, surface running torps much less so) or perhaps DWT style enhanced damage torps which can't hit DDs. 

[Aethervoxx]

Too late, Figment, you are months too late. The WoWS Subs escaped their pens months ago (if not a year or more even).

I'm sure you have great ideas but WF (pardon me, WG) ignores most of the good ideas that we passionate Forumites care about.

Sure, by all means, try to do your 'Care Bear' crusade (like so many others).

Me? I think someone at WG is a hunter & they shot the Care Bear a long time ago (around when the farce CV rework happened (well, actually, well before that as this farce was planned long before it happened).

[stefanorgano]

1 hour ago, invicta2012 said:

Torpedoes should also have a depth setting meter (this is realistic).

Realism? What is that, comrade? Is it something we can sell through lootboxes maybe comrade? 

[invicta2012]

40 minutes ago, stefanorgano said:

Realism? What is that, comrade? Is it something we can sell through lootboxes maybe comrade? 

Well, it was more about "fun" and "satisfying gameplay". Those are saleable commodities, although not as much fun as cheese triangle tie-ins (search for "U-69" for an explanation). 

[Figment]

Peops, understand the current emotions are running high with regards to WG and subs, but if you're not going to take this topic serious at some point, why should WG? Plenty of topics about "Subs bad" and "WG bad"atm, please have the courtesy to comment on what you like and dislike specifically about the design suggestion above, if there's anything you think can be done to improve on it.

[SodaBubbles]

6 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

The main thing wrong with the current ping mechanic is that a) the pings last too long, b) the Repair Party/cancel mechanic is stupid, c) they enable you to direct torpedoes at any ship you can ping within range, after launch. Which is just silly. Ping/sonar lock should last 25 seconds not 30,  defending players should be able to mitigate by some means other than RP,  and you should only be able to guide torpedoes to the target which was sonar-locked/pinged at the time you fired them. None of this speculative torp firing and changing targets halfway through.

Yes, or re-acquiring targets that broke your ping by pressing R. Pressing R should give you a grace period before you can be re--acquired.

 

6 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

 

Torpedoes should also have a depth setting meter (this is realistic). This would allow sub vs sub play to become more dramatic and skill based - enabling a player attacking an enemy sub to set a vertical torpedo spread across several depths, rather than the current farrago of trying to match your depth against the depth of the submarine you're firing at. This also opens up possibilities for variable torp detection ranges depending on running depth (5m would be difficult to BBs to spot, surface running torps much less so) or perhaps DWT style enhanced damage torps which can't hit DDs. 

 

[Sprockett]

6 hours ago, Figment said:

Peops, understand the current emotions are running high with regards to WG and subs, but if you're not going to take this topic serious at some point, why should WG? Plenty of topics about "Subs bad" and "WG bad"atm, please have the courtesy to comment on what you like and dislike specifically about the design suggestion above, if there's anything you think can be done to improve on it.

dude = just look at the 100 of pages on the CV feed back and all the serious and well written out ideas that are within those pages - yet still the game has a shitty time with CV's and their interaction. YOu have written a lovely well though out piece of work - that will be completely ignored by WarGambling - this is why a lot of the CCs have left as they feel that they are NOT listened too. You, my fine friend, are just a forumite that will be ignored - thank yo for wasting your time for nothing ...

 

[_Lupastro_]

14 ore fa, Figment ha scritto:

So taken from a number of posts, what I'd do with submarines to make them fit into WoWs better. I'd do a major overhaul of the sub mechanics that Wargaming came up with to make them both fairer, more diverse and more fun.

Role definition (scouting, flanking and assassination)

The sub role overlaps a lot with that of DDs, just that they're much worse at capping due to their fragility when surfaced, can't fire over any terrain and typically have much worse AA. However, they have some positioning advantages as they could sneak by or up really close before engaging, or scout targets that would be hard to scout with DDs and have a different means of escape and damage mitigation.

 

Spotting wise, subs can in principle go where DDs cannot go. If they can for instance make a move to bypass some ships and then spot or attack radar or other camping cruisers from certain positions a DD cannot easily reach, then that's an USP for them. With similar speeds to DDs (as is) and lowered detection range and submerging management play, this could be a viable and fun stealth gameplay addition. If you make subs invulnerable to radar (even if just at periscope depth), that's an additional advantage over, or useful alternative to, DD spotting in high tier matches. Your goal is to get as close as possible to the enemy, outflank them and strike, then try to survive any counterattack.

 

Starting locations:

Depending on map size, ~2.5km - 5km ahead of current DDs, halfway between the current starting positions (so more in between A-B or B-C on most maps, or higher up the sides of concentric ring maps). This should reduce the time to target a bit, but also provide a more viable and unpredictable choice where to go (center or flank). Slight reduction in travel time means sooner in action.

 

What to do with ping?: mainly navigation

The current ping mechanism is very flawed IMO and a separate design issue on its own that should not be conflated with submarine viability. IMO its frequency of use for homing torpedoes is both far too high as is to be fair against the temporary repair skill one has and in used for the wrong purpose (homing torpedoes, rather than distance and position gauging and navigation). The combination with citadelling ships is more than a little off and should have no relation to that. It should not be required for manual torping either. I could however, see pinging a ship required to attain the torpedo lead indicator.

 

Personally I think pings should be used primarily while at max depth to check for surface ships in particular directions, reveal the terrain ahead under water and be used for sub to sub combat (since elevation is an issue, some limited angle homing torps would be a good thing for sub to sub combat, but not per se for sub to ship combat). In that case, using a ping would not be necessary in sub to surface ship combat as this would be resolved at periscope depth and on the surface. But, it would be required to determine if it is save-ish to pop up again and give RPF-like info to surface ships in its direct vicinity, where one ping doesn't provide accurate info to either side, but receiving more frequent pings in a row and/or within a certain distance would increasingly accurately tell where they are. This could look like this: the first ping provides a range and wide vector, a second ping a narrower vector and a third ping show a targeting indicator over the ship. If the sub is within a certain range of the pinged ship(s), it would increasingly reveal its own location in the same way to enemy ships however.

 

Torpedo changes:

• Default torpedoes are fired at surface vessels manually, fire and forget, straight line.
• Same range of torpedo speeds as for DDs.
• Torpedo range varies between of ~4.5km to ~10.5km depending on tier, nation and ship and other stats like stealth capabilities etc.
• Reload times:
  • Torpedoes would be not reload set by set in subsequent order, but independently and simultaneously.
  • Reload times would be a bit longer to compensate for increased average damage per torpedo (though lowered maximum damage compared to citadels and keeping torpedo mitigation in mind)
  • This forces hit and run, rather than hit hit hit and move to next target as is possible today at times.
• Between torpedoes of the same tier, in general the longer the range, the lower the payload. Think difference between Skane's and Mahan's torpedoes (up to about 40% difference).
• Special torpedoes may exist, but their used should be conditional and limited:
  • Zig-zag torpedoes
    • Alternate mode to straight fire for some nation subs (could be given to some cruisers and DDs too)
    • Follow standard patterns
    • Can set it to zig or zag first by right clicking and cycling through the modes
  • Homing torpedoes
    • Used in sub-to-sub warfare by all nations to compensate for elevation changes and increased difficulty for distance determination
      • Homing torpedo steering angles are ~80% reduced with what they are now. Initial aim must be pretty accurate.
      • Acoustic homing torpedoes target the propellor of a ship at higher speeds (>=50%) and engine of a ship at lower speeds (<50%)
      • Magnetic homing torpedoes just target the nearest part of the ship (may still hit elsewhere due to limited steering)
    • Some (!) nations might have these torps as alternate mode to fire at surface ships, at both a significant cost of refire rate, or as limited consumeables and at a damage reduction (reasoning would be lower payload to make room for torpedo navigation system)
  • Deepwater torpedoes
    • Some nation subs can load deepwater torpedoes instead of regular torpedoes.
      • Deepwater torps can't hit DDs
      • Optional design:
        • periscope depth of a ship determines if they are regular or deepwater torpedoes, so less HE damage, but can't hit DDs from periscope depth
        • surface = always regular torpedoes
• A ship's torpedo belt is actually useful in preventing torpedo damage. Torpedoes are thus best aimed at bow or stern unless a ship has no torpedo belt.

 

ASW and torpedo countermeasures and prevention of always-submerged-when-it-matters:

• Depth charges. Same as now. Every vessel that had it should have it.
  • Maybe balance depth charges between nations in terms of number, spread and damage a bit better.
• HE damage up to about 1.5x-2x periscope depth, depending on shell caliber. BBs can thus use HE deeper than most cruisers and DDs.
• Hydroacoustic search detection radius:
  • Surfaced ships as per usual
  • Periscope depth -30% range
  • Maximum depth -60% range
  • Deep dive: -100% range, but as indicated below, deep diving may cause flooding(s). So forcing a sub to evade hydro and depth charges might still result in (significant) damage to the sub.
• Some (non-ASW in particular) ships could get a sonic decoy for defense purposes to throw off homing torpedoes
• New ship hull upgrade for some older BBs: anti-torpedo netting. Costs ship speed, but reduces the damage of torpedoes (can be destroyed like secondaries?)
• Means of forcing subs to surface or sinking them:
  • Anxiety of being detected increases oxygen usage by the crew by 15-25%, forcing the sub captain to pop up sooner or die through suffocation. Basically what happens now. So even if power suffices to stay under, this might be an issue.
  • Module damage:
    • Broken battery modules instantly reduce available power for diving by a set percentage of the remaining dive time (assuming batteries drain equally). Percentage depends on the amount of batteries on board.
    • Stuck elevator (forces up to surface, levelling or even uncontrolled deep dive depending on angle at time of damage) - requires ballast tank expulsion to safe from sinking and risking floods.
    • Flooding - Depending on amount of compartiments flooded: reduced surfacing rate, increased diving rate
    • Fire - Fires on subs reduce oxygen levels (increase oxygen usage by 30%)
    • Engine damage - reduced battery recharge rate at surface and periscope depth
    • Snorkel damage - reduced air intake rate, switch to electric power
• More limited dive time
  • Reduction from 6 minutes diving time to 2-4 minutes, depending on tier. Must make more strategic use of periscope depth and surfacing.
  • Difference in dive time on the basis of oxygen and power.
  • See below for recharge rates at surface and periscope depth. Note: Would be faster than today due to reduced dive time as you run out more quickly.

 

Diving limiters: oxygen and power (and hp)

First off, I'd have two limiters on diving: power and oxygen. If either runs out, the sub would be considered sunk and not just forced to the surface. So there'd be three ways to kill a sub: running out of hp, oxygen or power. Sitting on top of a sub could thus be a way to kill 'm off if the sub captain didn't manage their oxygen and power levels, even for non-ASW ships. HP wise nothing would change. The amounts of HP are fine as is IMO: they're very fragile units with a large striking capability.

 

(Dis)advantages of various depths:

NB: values are open to balancing, indicative values only.

 

Surfaced:

++ Optimal (surface) scouting range: full 360° surface vision, maximum detecting range (torpedo range +30%), ~2.5km sub-surface hydrophone range

++ Improved recharging of battery and oxygen (+30-50% recharge speed based on the nation).

+ Can use secondaries and AA

+ For most ships: optimal speed

+ Can effectively fire torpedoes at surface ships

+ Can move camera underwater for anti-sub warfare

+ Can cap/contest zones

+ Diesel engine active (batteries recharge)

- Could be detected by radar (though perhaps shorter than other ships due to limited sillhouette)

- Can't use all consumeables

- Worst detection range (~3.8km at lowest tiers up to ~5.8km at higher tiers)

-- Worst air detection range (~2km at lowest tiers up to ~3km at higher tiers)

 

Periscope depth:

+ (Surface) scouting range is equal to maximum torpedo range, or the minimum range of 6km. Information is shared with allies.

+ Reduced detection range (~2.5km at lower tiers up to ~3km at higher tiers)

+ Reduced air detection range (~1.5km at lowest tiers up to ~2km at higher tiers) - with AA off, of course.

+ Reduced HE damage (Depending on ship may have varying periscope depths and thus varying HE mitigation at this level)

+ Can effectively fire torpedoes at surface ships
+ Can use some defensive consumeables

+ Can move camera underwater for anti-sub warfare

+ Can't be detected by radar

+ With snorkel: diesel engine active: batteries recharge and oxygen levels recharge

- Usualy slower speed

- Can't cap/contest zones

- If no snorkel or snorkel damaged, batteries drain, air drains

- Reduced situational awareness: ~2.5km 360° from hydrophone, but 120° vision in the direction you're pointing the camera. Turn camera to get situational awareness for other directions.

- Can't use secondaries or AA

 

Diving depth:

++ Can use all defensive consumeables

+ Automatically switches to anti-submarine torpedoes when a submarine is targeted upon launch (have minor vertical homing-in to make hitting possible) - note: torpedoes are fire and forget

+ Optimal camera for anti-sub warfare

+ RPF skill would still show nearest enemy unit(s).

- Can't cap/contest zones

-- Only hydrophone/active ping vision resulting in severely reduced scouting ranges: ~2.5km around your ship

-- No information sharing with allies until resurfaced or periscope depth is reached - only killed enemies and allied subs are communicated to the team as usual

-- Map shows only last known positions and actively scouted ships.

-- Can't effectively target surface ships due to torp elevation angle

 

Consumables:

- Blow air tanks (infinite use, recharges at surface (fast) or snorkle depth (slow)); for emergency dives (at the cost of a significant percentage of oxygen and a little power and thus diving time).

- Blow ballast tanks (infinite use, recharges at snorkle depth or max depth); for emergency surfacing (at the cost of air tanks and a little power and thus charging for the next diving time would take longer)

- Fake death (limited use (1), additional or more effective depending on captain skills); which could only be employed when taking damage in the 10s before, which would leave an oil spill on the surface and leave the sub undetectable even by hydro for a minute as long as it remains at max depth.

- Go silent; temporarily reduce underwater base detection range by 50%, reduces max speed by 50%. Reduces if not stops homing effect on sub-to-sub torpedoes fired by other submarines at you.

- Engine boost; Same as normal, more effective for most ships on the surface. Reduces power faster when used under water.

- Emergency Pumps; Restores damage taken from flooding specifically.

- Deep dive; Temporarily increases max depth out of depth charge range, the player loses control of diving depth and automatically dives the ship and eventually brings it back to max level (as long as elevator rudder is repaired). During deep dive, floodings may arbitrarily occur. Say every 5 seconds of deep dive a flooding check is done. Up to three or four simultaneous floodings may occur. Captain skills could for instance reduce the chance of flooding and/or the frequency of checks during deep dive.

- Decoy buoy (limited use (2-3), additional depending on captain skills), for a limited time creates an alternative blip in the area with your name and hp over it for enemies to chase. Is launched from a forward torpedo tube, so if you want to use this may not want to launch after you've been detected, but in expectation of being detected, or launching it in advance to confuse an enemy and let them show broadside.

- Magnetic mine deployment (limited use (3-5, additional depending on captain skills); Deploys a mine from a surfaced submarine that engages enemy ships trying to pass by it within a short distance. Limited detection range (1km, 1.5km with vigilance), limited drift activation range (250m). Activates 15s after deployment. Deals high damage if an enemy ship hits it. Can be deactivated by friendlies, including the own sub through friendly fire. Relatively short reload time.

 

Other ship settings:

- AA / secondaries on/off (note: any secondaries should actually work)

- Switch between Active Ping/Passive hydrophone - basically, "auto-ping" on/off. Active ping would automatically ping for you, increasing detection range of environment and enemy ships by +200% , but also risk disclosing your location over time. With this setting off, the slower you move the larger your situational awareness (particularly useful at max depth). 100% speed = base detection range of 2.5km (+0%). 50% speed is +50% detection range, 25% speed = +100% detection range.

 

Also, potential special sub rule for wins: for a point score win, any last player on a team must be surfaced when the timer runs out.

Exceptional! Outstanding work.... Too much for WG...

 Great job! 

[Figment]

20 minutes ago, Sprockett said:

dude = just look at the 100 of pages on the CV feed back and all the serious and well written out ideas that are within those pages - yet still the game has a shitty time with CV's and their interaction. YOu have written a lovely well though out piece of work - that will be completely ignored by WarGambling - this is why a lot of the CCs have left as they feel that they are NOT listened too. You, my fine friend, are just a forumite that will be ignored - thank yo for wasting your time for nothing ...

 

Look, regardless of what WG does or does niot do, trolling post behavior on a serious thread shows a lack of respect towards your fellow players and community contributors, not them.

[Sprockett]

dude I am not trolling you - I am telling you that you are wasting your time - so do not bother - you are wasting your time.  Thats all - if you have the hours of time to waste then please be my guest - just note that not one of your ideas will be taken up, implemented or even discussed.  

WG does not listen or take any feed back.  This forum has become a trolling platform because WG does NOT listen to its players - so why bother making suggestions that will be ignored completely.

 

Put the suggestions behind loot boxes and gambling mechanics and they will probably listen - but not guarenteed!

[Figment]

30 minutes ago, Sprockett said:

dude I am not trolling you - I am telling you that you are wasting your time - so do not bother - you are wasting your time.  Thats all - if you have the hours of time to waste then please be my guest - just note that not one of your ideas will be taken up, implemented or even discussed.  

WG does not listen or take any feed back.  This forum has become a trolling platform because WG does NOT listen to its players - so why bother making suggestions that will be ignored completely.

 

Put the suggestions behind loot boxes and gambling mechanics and they will probably listen - but not guarenteed!

Look, I've been an online game community contributor since 2003. Most the times companies ignore you unless you have an inside man. For PlanetSide 2, I had a lead developer and level designer on speed dial and made a massive impact revamping their shoddy base design to take a new look at all bases on three 64km2 maps. They even designed that game because my essay made it to SOE's CEO via a passionate CRM. John Smedley (the CEO) directly quoted my critiques on SOE management of PlanetSide and other titles, as well as all the USPs and all opportunities and concepts I mentioned in that essay in his sales pitch for PS2 on the community forums. This was after 5 years of SOE neglect of the original game (one part time dev one to two days per two weeks was working on PS1). It's possible to make an impact, but not if you have a negative attitude and just give up.

 

For PS2, their player contribution system on cosmetics and other 3D work to reduce development time and have fresh, unique content contributed by players, as well as their free to play model setup (what kind of micro-transactions would players accept) was my idea. It turned out to be very lucrative source of income for both SOE (they could focus on unit and level design) and community contributors (income from skins and camo sales). After I got on the community council, I got ignored for two years, wasn't even in alpha. Gave some feedback on DCUO, not much was done with that. I and a few other PS1 contributors didn't get to talk to PS2 developers as promised. Got into PS2 beta and had them made huge changes by accurately predicting how new stuff would pan out (very badly), which got me noticed again and I eventually got into contact with the lead developer and a level designer. The latter I taught about defensive base layout for this kind of combined arms game (onion structure with transition between indoor infantry and outdoor vehicle combat, as well as basic castle design principles). I gave them concept designs for all sorts of fortifcaction stuff, 80% of which was used in game from roofing to friendly fire pass-through shielding to deployable spawn groundvehicle design. They revamped and revised their base lay-outs, closed too open tower designs, layered defenses, changed the accessibility to a lot of the base entrances (less open to vehicle spam), the spawn room positions and rooms, defensive tunnels (bit of a band-aid to overcome issues with spawnroom-objective reaching without complete base redesign), the addition of certain units, a more consistent chat/map system design and availability in menus and game (not losing connection to the game world while in a menu). 

 

But getting that entry level took me years of quality posts to get noticed, an entry into a player council, visits at Gamescom and more. I know how hard it is to get stuff through.

 

For Wargaming and Gaijinn, what matters is the popularity and quality of the posting to get anything added. If players agree en mass to a feature it is harder to ignore. Some stuff I provided feedback on during and after beta (and I'm sure I wasn't the only one) did get added in both WoWs, WoT and War Thunder. This was mostly minor UI related stuff. The thing here is that bashing WG alone will not get anything done. Spoonfeeding them worked out, constructive posts MIGHT, MIGHT, get noticed. That's enough for me. I don't need anyone telling me their personal speculation of success chances. I know the odds. I also know it's possible, especially at a moment when they need some good press.

 

What they will and won't do (according to anyone but their CRMs and Devs - and even that is questionable) is irrelevant. All one does by trollposting (mocking WG here) or not contributing is distracting from the topic and discouraging community feedback and lessening the worth of the constructive feedback. :/