Are subs MORE impactful than CV's???

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Wazz happened with the "Cv's are not OP", "just dodge", "they don't do much dmg" "poor little things", "oh my precious" and alike?They were pushed for years, right?

[Andrewbassg]

12 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

 I would say more like this....

 

 

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

16 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Wazz happened with the "Cv's are not OP", "just dodge", "they don't do much dmg" "poor little things", "oh my precious" and alike?They were pushed for years, right? Now its the turn for the subs?

please quote me saying any of that.

 

20 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

*yawns* So in other words you have absolutely no evidence to dispute what I have said. 

 

Well done.

Who needs any evidence to dispute the obvious nonsense you spout? It's clear for everyone to see. You might not have noticed yet but the entertainment you provided was fun for a short bit only

[Andrewbassg]

14 minutes ago, Yuu5Eleven said:

please quote me saying any of that.

You wanna argue about what is de facto, de jure also what is in effect and what's the difference between them?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

11 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

You wanna argue about what is de facto, de jure also what is in effect and what's the difference between them?

Sorry what? I already stated multiple times that CVs are indeed OP. And with them being OP they also have the greatest battle influence of every ship class closely followed by DDs. Subs are as low as BBs in battle influence. What is there to argue about?

[Spellfire40]

Subs are certainly the most anoying things. You finally get over them with half the enemy team shreding you to bits when not playing a BB and they dive deep and show you the one finger salute for your tryng to engage in anti sub conterplay.

[DDsOnly]

For DDs, CV are a lot worse, planes make no sense, zipping around the map and attack at will without reporcussion

[Figment]

On 5/7/2022 at 2:44 PM, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Submarine players have complete control and those that don't lack a real understanding of what they are capable of in the ship. A submarine has the ability to come up to you undetected and dev strike you with the only warning being those rocket pings and the torp train that is headed your way.

Please help me interpret the stats on the subs you've played? What exactly did you dev strike, you being in complete control and having 'real', full capability understanding of what the ship can do and all? How often did this happen and what were your targets?

 

Because it's a lot rarer than you seem to think and it's quite possible you've not even done so yourself so far given your stats suggest you at most could have killed a DD or cruiser in a single strike, while in other matches barely denting anything at all (such is the power of averages, can have had horrible matches and one good one after all and on subs that can be extreme). Given the hit pools at TX though, you've not hit quite a lot of things with the all-mighty subs that can sneak up on anything and everything and are supposedly in complete control of the engagement. They're not.

 

 

 

Look, I'm not that great with subs myself (hell, I accidentally pressed "raise to surface" several times when trying to press DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD and/or diiiiiiiiiiive button >.<" - which is not good for your sub's health btw). But are you sure you're quite capable of determining how hard it is to get in a dev strike position? Many torpedoes didn't deal that sort of damage either without a double ping and citadels registering (which already changed) and to ensure hits you often couldn't use pings because the homing torps were unreliable in well... homing in on anything but islands and open sea due to it being a two part control type ordinance (your opponent indirectly controls the direction of your torps).

 

Many a single DD torp can kill another DD. This isn't even true for most subs. There are pros and cons here, what with how ping works if used properly, but dev strikes even in the current poor design situation happen only on ships that made themselves an easy target, while they should have known there's a sub in the area.  (Positioning in open water without any cover nearby and risking needing repair for HE fire spam, both of which can be mitigated for with positioning).

 

Besides, even if it were common, that's a pretty simple damage balancing fix (i.e. reduce alpha damage) and not an argument against the concept of the sub.

 

I would say the most important thing to get right with subs is the detection system from both ends. Single strike power is a related, but consecutive discussion IMO.

On 5/7/2022 at 2:44 PM, The_Angry_Admiral said:

You could say "well any ship in the hands of a good player" blah blah blah but with submarines you get game breaking results. 

I think your games in subs were broken indeed. But not quite in the way you portray it... :/ Don't make such hyperboles if you can't prove game breaking.

 

And if you think dev strikes out of nowhere are gamebreaking, maybe talk to the BB class (long range) and DDs (longrange torpspam) a bit. Those are 100% accepted forms of dev strikes and far less rare and less hard work getting in a good position in my experience.

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

And if you think dev strikes out of nowhere are gamebreaking, maybe talk to the BB class (long range) and DDs (longrange torpspam) a bit. Those are 100% accepted forms of dev strikes and far less rare and less hard work getting in a good position in my experience.

But far less boring, both on the attacking and receiving side 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Please help me interpret the stats on the subs you've played? What exactly did you dev strike, you being in complete control and having 'real', full capability understanding of what the ship can do and all? How often did this happen and what were your targets?

 

Because it's a lot rarer than you seem to think and it's quite possible you've not even done so yourself so far given your stats suggest you at most could have killed a DD or cruiser in a single strike, while in other matches barely denting anything at all (such is the power of averages, can have had horrible matches and one good one after all and on subs that can be extreme). Given the hit pools at TX though, you've not hit quite a lot of things with the all-mighty subs that can sneak up on anything and everything and are supposedly in complete control of the engagement. They're not.

 

 

 

Look, I'm not that great with subs myself (hell, I accidentally pressed "raise to surface" several times when trying to press DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD and/or diiiiiiiiiiive button >.<" - which is not good for your sub's health btw). But are you sure you're quite capable of determining how hard it is to get in a dev strike position? Many torpedoes didn't deal that sort of damage either without a double ping and citadels registering (which already changed) and to ensure hits you often couldn't use pings because the homing torps were unreliable in well... homing in on anything but islands and open sea due to it being a two part control type ordinance (your opponent indirectly controls the direction of your torps).

 

Many a single DD torp can kill another DD. This isn't even true for most subs. There are pros and cons here, what with how ping works if used properly, but dev strikes even in the current poor design situation happen only on ships that made themselves an easy target, while they should have known there's a sub in the area.  (Positioning in open water without any cover nearby and risking needing repair for HE fire spam, both of which can be mitigated for with positioning).

 

Besides, even if it were common, that's a pretty simple damage balancing fix (i.e. reduce alpha damage) and not an argument against the concept of the sub.

 

I would say the most important thing to get right with subs is the detection system from both ends. Single strike power is a related, but consecutive discussion IMO.

I think your games in subs were broken indeed. But not quite in the way you portray it... :/ Don't make such hyperboles if you can't prove game breaking.

 

And if you think dev strikes out of nowhere are gamebreaking, maybe talk to the BB class (long range) and DDs (longrange torpspam) a bit. Those are 100% accepted forms of dev strikes and far less rare and less hard work getting in a good position in my experience.

Why are you doing your best to try and pretend the problem doesn't exist?

 

BTW: I stopped playing subs after the first time. I don't want to contribute to the problem.

[Figment]

6 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

But far less boring, both on the attacking and receiving side 

BB overkill just makes you want to throw away certain cruisers and never play them again when they’re extra squishy in comparison to others on the higher tiers.

 

I can’t see that happening with torp attacks. The only other time I’ve had that with were a double set torp strikes from an US TX carrier where the aircraft had not been spotted.

 

Well played by the CV, but what was WG thinking on balancing there?

 

Subs otoh, I shrug when I see them spotted in game, map click m, prioritize them, keep alerting allies to their presence and likely next move, get them killed, whether self, airstrike spammed or allied focus and move on once swiftly dispatched. I can’t say they have ever been a problem. If you let them get close in a way you don’t control, that’s IMO more your fault as a team than game design.

 

Again, it is a bad design and meh gameplay, but the crocodile tears and hypocrisy from BB mains especially. For crying out loud…

[Figment]

6 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Why are you doing your best to try and pretend the problem doesn't exist?

Why are you and other people not able to read?

 

There is a difference between what partisan people think is a debate (supporting everything your side says no matter how dumb and ignorant it is, basically 90% of the world and also this forum population does that). Then there is looking at things more nuanced and not being able to stand liars and frauds, even if they’re supposedly on the same team.

 

Unlike some people, no, I don’t explode with baby tears angry at the world being so unfair to them and unable and unwilling to accept that there are features, elements and other things you can work with to make something work. Instead, people here only think in the present and past, too uncreative, too shallow, to low on thinking power, to look beyond a given situation.

 

So, I correct people when they’re being foolish humans.

6 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

BTW: I stopped playing subs after the first time. I don't want to contribute to the problem.

You are, you are contributing nothing but malice and misinformation based on prejudice, ignorance and incompetence instead of being constructive by understanding the problem, knowing what is actually wrong and providing an alternative so that WG can make changes for the better without losing too much face since there is clearly ego involved.

 

Unfortunately people like you are too busy bashing and making sure devs refuse to even read the forums to avoid the abuse.

[guy_incognito79]

23 minutes ago, Figment said:

 

 

You are, you are contributing nothing but malice and misinformation based on prejudice, ignorance and incompetence instead of being constructive by understanding the problem,

The key problem here is that subs are being forced into the game in a broken state against the wishes of many players, this is going to generate a malevolent attitude.

 

[SolanumTuberosumRex]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

BB overkill just makes you want to throw away certain cruisers and never play them again when they’re extra squishy in comparison to others on the higher tiers.

If you get devstruck in a cruiser by a BB, you almost always brought that on yourself. In other words, you f*cked up, you could have prevented it.

I've gotten devstruck by a sub. There was NO WAY to know he was there, no way to avoid the torps. I was well angled against BB's, I was spotted but I knew by whom and I was basically safe from fire from surface ships. But there was also a sub that hadn't been spotted, and that crept up on me and launched. No chance at all.

I'm a cruiser main and when BB's kill me they earned it. I messed up. With subs. There. Is. No. Counterplay. 

[Figment]

44 minutes ago, guy_incognito79 said:

The key problem here is that subs are being forced into the game in a broken state against the wishes of many players, this is going to generate a malevolent attitude.

The problem is more that the players in question have conditioned themselves to take anything, make it their next biggest grieving fear (Dutch cruisers will ruin the game forever1!1!1!1!!!) and exaggerate everything just because they have been upset for years.

 

They can’t give credit to anything the “enemy” is doing, they can’t critique anymore (if they ever could) with nuance. They can only cry about how much worse the next thing is to roll with the bandwagon.

 

That has never worked and will never work as a strategy to motivate because they know to doesn’t matter what they’ll do, people are going to cry that it is the worst thing ever with “no counterplay!2!1!1!1!1!1!2!2!2” and “the game is dieink for the fiftieth timezors! The end is nigh this time I will almost quit!” Devs will look at it and go “oh another whiner who has been doing that for ten years, tune out please”.

 

Nobody is and nobody should take you serious if you do that.

 

Just like on any other fan forum on the internet. It is pathetic. As usual.

 

Say something that disagrees with the whiners in any way and they’ll paint you into a corner because their tiny minds and fragile cannot handle dissent.

 

 

I state there are forms of counterplay to contrast the ruling willful ignorance argument or expose hypocrisy arguments in hopes they will up their game and actually scrutinize and come up with something more creative. And what do you get?

 

Stigmatization, whataboutism, “no you” and scapegoating. I’m suddenly the bad guy who loves subs as implemented by WG. I even dared play some to verify if the exaggerations are true. Egads how evil. People who think this way are just so dumb, and plentiful due to being partisan hacks hoping to get their bandwagon buddies to do the thinking for them. I really can’t respect that. :/

[Figment]

20 minutes ago, PsychoClownfish said:

If you get devstruck in a cruiser by a BB, you almost always brought that on yourself. In other words, you f*cked up, you could have prevented it.

I've gotten devstruck by a sub. There was NO WAY to know he was there, no way to avoid the torps. I was well angled against BB's, I was spotted but I knew by whom and I was basically safe from fire from surface ships. But there was also a sub that hadn't been spotted, and that crept up on me and launched. No chance at all.

I'm a cruiser main and when BB's kill me they earned it. I messed up. With subs. There. Is. No. Counterplay. 

Aww. Cute anecdote. And ignorance and mistakes made and scapegoating on WG for own errors and hypocrisy. Thanks. Needed more BS.

 

EDIT: no that BB didn’t work for anything. Someone scouted for it, it fired from out of your detection range, got lucky with rng. All you could do is angle if you had known it had an angle. You do that with DDs too. It is called anticipation. You told me before you explicitly refuse to adapt to a situation involving a sub, then refuse to take any tips how to be more prepared and then whine there is no counterplay, because you don’t want to accept subs. You don’t want to admit there is. Admitting that would ruin your argument for removal. Your argument is too weak and you know it, therefore you will try to tar any dissent from your willfully ignorant views and actions with a huge brush. You will try to bury any arguments. Deny any counter arguments and just act as a plain bully. Pathetic.

[Nibenay78]

20 minutes ago, Figment said:

The problem is more that the players in question have conditioned themselves to take anything, make it their next biggest grieving fear (Dutch cruisers will ruin the game forever1!1!1!1!!!) and exaggerate everything just because they have been upset for years.

You mean WG conditioned us...

 

I never had huge problems with games that changed. Sure sometimes it's not what I want.. but its fine.

This was not the case with WG and their rework, then lots of insanity afterwards.. and lies.

[SolanumTuberosumRex]

18 minutes ago, Figment said:

Aww. Cute anecdote. And ignorance and mistakes made and scapegoating on WG for own errors and hypocrisy. Thanks. Needed more BS.

If that's what you take away from my detailed description of what happened, it just shows you for what you are. Not pretty.

18 minutes ago, Figment said:

EDIT: no that BB didn’t work for anything. Someone scouted for it, it fired from out of your detection range, got lucky with rng. All you could do is angle if you had known it had an angle.

Are you saying those are the only circumstances in which a BB can get a devstrike on a cruiser? Really?

Quote

You told me before you explicitly refuse to adapt to a situation involving a sub, then refuse to take any tips how to be more prepared

I never told you anything of the kind. Only senility now excuses you.

Quote

You don’t want to admit there is. Admitting that would ruin your argument for removal. Your argument is too weak and you know it

If it were my PoV only, I would have to supply even more arguments. As it stands, YOU are one of a very few who insists on an untenable position.

Quote

therefore you will try to tar any dissent from your willfully ignorant views and actions with a huge brush. You will try to bury any arguments. Deny any counter arguments and just act as a plain bully. Pathetic.

Poor baby feels bullied? Or is just that you chose a ridiculous point of view and now cannot handle the fact the only other person on your side of the argument is an actual troll?

[Karasu_Browarszky]

3 hours ago, Figment said:

Again, it is a bad design and meh gameplay, but the crocodile tears and hypocrisy from BB mains especially. For crying out loud…

 

Subs ruin the game for not just the BB's, but for every ship class. CV's are probably the safest as the subs have plenty of other targets more easily available.

 

There's also a difference, at least as far as I see it, between the subs and the CV's and that is target selection. Subs tend to be focused on one area, one ship, as they can't pick and choose over the whole map as situations change. Also, if they are smart they make sure they are in a position that can be supported by their team mates. For CV's, support is not an issue.

 

That tells you something about how screwed up the game is tacticswise; slightly exaggerated, the subs are the team players, and the CV's are the lone wolves.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

3 hours ago, Figment said:

Why are you and other people not able to read?

 

There is a difference between what partisan people think is a debate (supporting everything your side says no matter how dumb and ignorant it is, basically 90% of the world and also this forum population does that). Then there is looking at things more nuanced and not being able to stand liars and frauds, even if they’re supposedly on the same team.

 

Unlike some people, no, I don’t explode with baby tears angry at the world being so unfair to them and unable and unwilling to accept that there are features, elements and other things you can work with to make something work. Instead, people here only think in the present and past, too uncreative, too shallow, to low on thinking power, to look beyond a given situation.

 

So, I correct people when they’re being foolish humans.

You are, you are contributing nothing but malice and misinformation based on prejudice, ignorance and incompetence instead of being constructive by understanding the problem, knowing what is actually wrong and providing an alternative so that WG can make changes for the better without losing too much face since there is clearly ego involved.

 

Unfortunately people like you are too busy bashing and making sure devs refuse to even read the forums to avoid the abuse.

Are you having a laugh?

[Figment]

1 hour ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Are you having a laugh?

With some of you, it is laughably ridiculous.

3 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

You mean WG conditioned us...

 

I never had huge problems with games that changed. Sure sometimes it's not what I want.. but its fine.

This was not the case with WG and their rework, then lots of insanity afterwards.. and lies.

Played since beta, I’m a bit brighter than conditioning myself. No, WG doesn’t condition anyone. People react to them in predictable fanboy fashion because they can’t help and articulate their actual issues in something more meaningful than “I don’t like it, it hurts my personal playstyle, remove it”. Not “tweak it like this”, not “overhaul it in this manner, but keep that and this element”, not “I would have done it this way from the ground up”, not “this thing they did is nice, could be used with this and this to make it work”.

 

No, from beta (though really, alpha probably), people just go straight to “it can’t be done, because I can’t imagine it any other way than this way and thus it must be removed, I’m right and anyone who doesn’t agree is a WG patsy and I’ll bully those who disagree or just show of my negativity.”

 

That is just laziness, unconstructive trolling and probably a lack of education (in design). Because you can do these things in a million and more combinations of mechanics and balances. Just because WG tried a couple that didn’t quite work is no reason to assume it can’t work in any way, shape or form. That’s just stupidity speaking. In fact, that they havn’t broken the game with some I must say very poor combinations of choices shows it actually can be done if the right mechanics and balances are combined.

 

I mean, I just put up a topic with some of the things I’d do and clownfish and admiral for instance would still accuse me of wanting the opposite because they’re too busy labeling prejudices and denouncing people that disagree with their laughable quality argumentation.

 

3 hours ago, PsychoClownfish said:

If that's what you take away from my detailed description of what happened, it just shows you for what you are. Not pretty.

Your description isn’t detailed, but your earlier description of how you fight and aren’t on the lookout for subs in your area spoke volumes.

 

It is what you didn’t say more than what you did say: you’re busy with cruisers and BB, you ignore other threats and then complain that you didn’t see it coming. Worse, you explicitly argued you didn’t want to know how to deal with them or adapt. That’s your limitation and self-imposed handicap. But you blame the subs, not yourself.

 

Again, doesn’t mean subs are fine as is, it means you’re crying and exaggerating because you put yourself in harms way and your ego can’t accept that you didn’t do everything right.

Quote

Are you saying those are the only circumstances in which a BB can get a devstrike on a cruiser? Really?

Am I? Really? Are you putting words in my mouth again? Oh gee yes you are. Come on Mary, let’s dance again!

 

No cuteness. Figure it out and grow up.

Quote

I never told you anything of the kind. Only senility now excuses you.

Except you did… Multiple times while crying “no counterplay”.

Quote

If it were my PoV only, I would have to supply even more arguments. As it stands, YOU are one of a very few who insists on an untenable position.

Few people have the stamina to talk to stupid brick walls and take their abusive toxicity and just left the forums eons ago.

 

If it were an untenable position than how is it you can’t come up with any arguments to disprove it? And no, simply stating the same utter nonsense out of ignorance and anecdotes where you messed up time and again just makes me respect you less and dismiss you more easily.

Quote

Poor baby feels bullied? Or is just that you chose a ridiculous point of view and now cannot handle the fact the only other person on your side of the argument is an actual troll?

Aww. So cute. The Clownfish is attempting an argument ad populum (read: “I have more trolls than you on my side”) on top of more bullying due to having no arguments to fall back on…

 

Yep, doesn’t seem to get much traction that argument of yours. Do I look like the kind of person who likes you, jumps on the troll bandwagons of easy and misplaced arguments, when I explicitly went out of my way to pull of the bandwagon’s wheels, point out none of them know what they’re talking about because their argumentation is too shallow to get anywhere, knowing the trolls would all fall over me as usual? Do you think other people who share my view would enjoy this? Your kind doesn’t tolerate the presence of other views, you want a single view (your arrogant and ignorant want) to dominate and you’ll try to silence others.

 

Guess what. Doesn’t work on me. Still here since beta. Try something else. Maybe something intelligent, if you can.

 

As for popularity of my views… Try reading my suggestion topic. You might be surprised what you find.

[nerderklaus]

Submarines are so broken that they need a complete re-design or removal.

 

They are even worse for the CV, because even worse players can ruin the match for someone and they are sneakier and stickier with their attacks than a CV combined with their attacks being more foolproof. Failing attacks in the submarine and getting discovered as submarine is much more forgiving than it would be in a CV. CV is chosen as reference, because they are considered broken.

[FukushuNL]

On 5/7/2022 at 9:34 PM, Spellfire40 said:

Subs are certainly the most anoying things. You finally get over them with half the enemy team shreding you to bits when not playing a BB and they dive deep and show you the one finger salute for your tryng to engage in anti sub conterplay.

So you would say a sub taking half the match to get one ship spotted is more annoying than a ship that takes 30 seconds to spot you? And a ship that is for all intends and purposes immune to attacks and is not affected by mountains and other obstacles. 

 

I understand that if anywhere in the match you are the target of the current itteration of a sub that is super frustrating, but that means ship everywhere else are at least safe for the forseeable time. With a CV, when you are targeted and blown out of the water by concentrated fire, one of your teammates is getting harrassed in the next 30 seconds and the one after in 30 seconds more.

 

But yeah, the new subs might as well be invincible as I saw that multiple runs of ASW doesn't kill it and the ping notification springs up randomly. So in that way, they are as uncatchable as a CV camping on the other side of the map.

[FukushuNL]

7 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

Subs are more impactful and more broken in a random battle. In fact they are so disruptive to the gameplay that they must be completely redesigned or even better permanently canceled.

 

There is less counterplay against them and less negative impact from being uptiered.

 

What I notice heavily is that when someone tries to win a game, f.e. kitingthe abandomed flank or pushing something. The submarine punishes this gameplay even harder than CV. The other bad thing is that a submarine is so broken that anybody can become scary, even these people who make manage to finish last and get lowest damage while playing a super CV. The homing must be completely removed. You can kite lots of torp boats in a BB, but it doesn't work like this against the new bias class.

 

Anyway, I got the impression that activity has gone down significantly since there are the new subs. Maybe this is their reason for the recent pole. It doesn't help the situation that apparentlly rigged MM got worse as well.

CVs are exactly the same apart from CVs bring fast and their actual damagable hull is camping in the next map, while subs are slow and can be hit by lucky ASW, for how much good that might do in the current itteration as pings are random spots and Subs have massive HP.

 

For the rest, they are the same broken op sh*tclass. Only CV's speed makes them a terror to the whole map.

[El2aZeR]

8 hours ago, Figment said:

That is just laziness, unconstructive trolling and probably a lack of education (in design).

 

Anyone with a basic understanding of game design will tell you that subs are untenable with how WG wants them to work. In fact subs seem to lack any actual design direction to begin with.

Anyone with a basic understanding of how WG works will know that they essentially want nothing but an echo chamber showering them with praise. This was revealed ages ago via multiple instances and I don't just mean the usual drama queen suspects either. Feedback of any kind otherwise is largely wasted.

 

In fact the only times WG did go back on their decisions was via massive community backlash, while constructive feedback has never been acted upon. So based on success rate simply telling WG that they suck has a better chance of working than providing feedback in a constructive and civil manner.