Hope to reduce the speed of submarine

[Macross_]

The speed of battleships, cruisers, destroyers and aircraft carriers is based on historical reality. Why does the speed of submarines become so exaggerated? Is this technology 70 years ago? I even think it's 70 years from now

[Karkong_the_Impaler]

The detection radius of subs should depend on speed. The issue is, if you take away the speed, you would also need to take away the aircraft dropped derp charges and/or allow them to stay submerged indefinitely for the engagement which in turn probably isn't as "fun and engaging" for an arcade game loosely based on ships.

 

Take it or leave it. I mean, subs are the issue? What about supershits? Supershit CVs? BBs deleting light cruisers in one salvo while crying when burning down over five minutes?

[MoveZig]

If this were "World of Convoy Raiding", that would make sense. In combat against warships, not so much.

[lovelacebeer]

Quite simply  it’s because WG was too lazy to put the actual work into changing the game sufficiently to make subs fit.
 

They just shoved them in, so it was easier for them to just ignore all pretence of historical accuracy (despite WG trotting out that excuse when it suits them) and give subs very weird characteristics. Which actually takes away everything fun about submarine gameplay which good submarine games have. 

[TonyStarkshoudnthavedied]

4 hours ago, Macross_ said:

The speed of battleships, cruisers, destroyers and aircraft carriers is based on historical reality.

You realize this is as far from the truth as can be. The speed, acceleration, deceleration capabilities of ships in the game are totally unrealistic. These ships are running at 300-500 km/h, accelerating like cars. Turning at those speeds in impossible radiuses. The marked speeds are not true speeds. Calculate distance/time and you will realize the true speed applied in the game. If they would go on their real speeds one battle would be a day, and 20 minutes would not be enough for a battleship to start moving. The enemy 30 kms from you would not be spot for hours. Did 70 years ago technology exists to have a constant targeting view above and slightly behind the ship? Was there technology which synced targeting of all guns of all turrets? Was there technology to direct all AA and secondary fire automatically? Was there radar and sonar which have seen throw solid rock? Was there technology which instantly transmitted positions of detected enemy ships to all allied ships and so accurate that it was useful for creating perfect firing solutions? was there technology which miraculously extended your firing range if you sent up a spotter? Was there a technology which allowed carrier based aircrafts to transmit enemy positions but somehow this same technology did not exists for land based air strike forces? And I can go on an on. In this game literally nothing is realistic, it is an arcade game based on imaginary physics (on a flat earth) and imaginary technologies. So don't pick a single one and complain. Either you suspend your disbelief for all, or nothing. But if the latter, you cant enjoy the game really.

[Figment]

The main reason for the sub speed is logistical reasons from a game perspective. Subs require line of sight at relatively short ranges compared to most other ships. This creates longer routes for them (also one reason why they're relatively easy to predict, they usualy can't go around the long way due to limited game time. So the shortest route from A to B has a very likely chance to be used by the sub once it moves on to a new hunting ground).

 

As is, most of the time they still can't relocate in time to assist both flanks if they weren't staying somewhat central. They still can't move fast enough to not have to surface next to enemies if they are pressured by persistent enemy ships who know what they do.

 

At higher tiers they might be a bit faster, but they still can't engage as quickly as units that can fire over terrain.

[Panocek]

6 minutes ago, Figment said:

The main reason for the sub speed is logistical reasons from a game perspective. Subs require line of sight at relatively short ranges compared to most other ships. This creates longer routes for them (also one reason why they're relatively easy to predict, they usualy can't go around the long way due to limited game time. So the shortest route from A to B has a very likely chance to be used by the sub once it moves on to a new hunting ground).

 

As is, most of the time they still can't relocate in time to assist both flanks if they weren't staying somewhat central. They still can't move fast enough to not have to surface next to enemies if they are pressured by persistent enemy ships who know what they do.

 

At higher tiers they might be a bit faster, but they still can't engage as quickly as units that can fire over terrain.

Shh, don't bring logic to "controversial class" topics

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 hour ago, Panocek said:

Shh, don't bring logic to "controversial class" topics

 

Nor "historical accuracy" to any discussion involving WG.

[Macross_]

3 hours ago, TonyStarkshoudnthavedied said:

You realize this is as far from the truth as can be. The speed, acceleration, deceleration capabilities of ships in the game are totally unrealistic. These ships are running at 300-500 km/h, accelerating like cars. Turning at those speeds in impossible radiuses. The marked speeds are not true speeds. Calculate distance/time and you will realize the true speed applied in the game. If they would go on their real speeds one battle would be a day, and 20 minutes would not be enough for a battleship to start moving. The enemy 30 kms from you would not be spot for hours. Did 70 years ago technology exists to have a constant targeting view above and slightly behind the ship? Was there technology which synced targeting of all guns of all turrets? Was there technology to direct all AA and secondary fire automatically? Was there radar and sonar which have seen throw solid rock? Was there technology which instantly transmitted positions of detected enemy ships to all allied ships and so accurate that it was useful for creating perfect firing solutions? was there technology which miraculously extended your firing range if you sent up a spotter? Was there a technology which allowed carrier based aircrafts to transmit enemy positions but somehow this same technology did not exists for land based air strike forces? And I can go on an on. In this game literally nothing is realistic, it is an arcade game based on imaginary physics (on a flat earth) and imaginary technologies. So don't pick a single one and complain. Either you suspend your disbelief for all, or nothing. But if the latter, you cant enjoy the game really.

I mean, you should not stack all good things on a ship with excellent concealment, super speed, high damage torpedoes and survivability no less than that of a destroyer. Can you imagine sima and kleber forming a boat?

[Macross_]

The submarine should not have such a high speed. It can walk in a straight line when it is underwater. In a silent night, if you want not to disturb the other party, you should walk slowly and silently instead of running

[Figment]

58 minutes ago, Macross_ said:

It can walk in a straight line when it is underwater.

It needs to get a good angle on the target, so with ships being nose in from where the sub starts, rather than go in at a straight line and end up easily dodged, it is better to make a big curve to get in the side of the target, while staying far enough away that you might get to a safe spot to surface. Meanwhile evading aircraft, DDs, radar, hydro and any sudden surprises if it's too close to the surface when rounding a corner of an island (not knowing what is behind it).

 

The direct route for a sub has up and downsides, but the relatively short underwater time (if the battery is not active for U-boats) makes for some consideration. It's not as simple as you make it seem. But as said, subs may often not have much of a choice if they want to participate in an engagement that's further away in time to have an impact at all.

 

Use this information to your advantage.

2 hours ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

Nor "historical accuracy" to any discussion involving WG.

The day scaling and WarGaming become accurate is the day I eat a car sized hamburger.

[LukkaiCH]

Vor 4 Stunden, TonyStarkshoudnthavedied sagte:

You realize this is as far from the truth as can be.

You are not wrong here. But the speed of the ships still usually fits their historic counterparts when put in relation to the others in the game. That is not the case with submarines. As lovelacebeer and Figment rightly stated, there are reasons for that. That does not mean that one has to like them.

 

Stunden, TonyStarkshoudnthavedied sagte:

Was there technology which synced targeting of all guns of all turrets?

Fun fact: Yes, there was.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

3 minutes ago, Figment said:

It needs to get a good angle on the target, so with ships being nose in from where the sub starts, a straight line it is better to make a big curve to get in the side of the target, while staying far enough away that you might get to a safe spot to surface. Meanwhile evading aircraft, DDs, radar, hydro and any sudden surprises if it's too close to the surface when rounding a corner of an island (not knowing what is behind it).

 

The direct route for a sub has up and downsides, but the relatively short underwater time (if the battery is not active for U-boats) makes for some consideration. It's not as simple as you make it seem. But as said, subs may often not have much of a choice if they want to participate in an engagement that's further away in time to have an impact at all.

 

 

There was, of course, a reason why attempts to integrate submarines in fleet engagements failed. In the real world, that is, because in real life you can't force something that isn't within the realm of possibilities.

[Figment]

7 minutes ago, LukkaiCH said:

You are not wrong here. But the speed of the ships still usually fits their historic counterparts when put in relation to the others in the game. That is not the case with submarines. As lovelacebeer and Figment rightly stated, there are reasons for that. That does not mean that one has to like them.

The top tier subs speeds in particular are seemingly adjusted for the map size, rather than scale with the units it faces.

 

IMO those speeds aren't needed. I'd prefer them changing the starting position of the sub to be a bit further forward. Underwater speeds should not exceed the speed of DDs (at most 85%-90% including boosters). Surface speeds I'm okay with them being up to 95% of DDs or have a couple temp boosters that drain the underwater time battery. Should be enough to spot them and close in a bit.

[Karkong_the_Impaler]

1 minute ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

There was, of course, a reason why attempts to integrate submarines in fleet engagements failed. In the real world, that is, because in real life you can't force something that isn't within the realm of possibilities.

 

They put steam turbines into the K class so they were able to keep up with surface ships.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_May_Island

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine

 

Maybe remove subs higher than tier 3 and make a game mode for them where they have to sneak up on liberty ship bots all day long?

[LukkaiCH]

Vor 1 Minute, Figment sagte:

Surface speeds I'm okay with them being up to 95% of DDs or have a couple temp boosters that drain the underwater time battery. Should be enough to spot them and close in a bit.

"On popular wishes we have now adjusted the surface speed of submarines to be no more than 95% of Kléber's at maximum." XD

 

Sorry, that just popped right up in my mind when reading it.

[lovelacebeer]

3 minutes ago, Karkong_the_Impaler said:

 

They put steam turbines into the K class so they were able to keep up with surface ships.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_May_Island

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine

 

Maybe remove subs higher than tier 3 and make a game mode for them where they have to sneak up on liberty ship bots all day long?

The K class were a very novel idea, although sadly they earned there nickname of the Kalamity class. 
 

What is a pity is WG will almost certainly never add the R class which were a very creative idea for a submarine hunter. 

[Figment]

6 minutes ago, LukkaiCH said:

"On popular wishes we have now adjusted the surface speed of submarines to be no more than 95% of Kléber's at maximum." XD

 

Sorry, that just popped right up in my mind when reading it.

I was more talking about the average speeds than the top speeds (I would hope obviously :D).

 

Sub with hydroplane and jetengine though.

[LukkaiCH]

Vor 1 Minute, Figment sagte:

I was more talking about the average speeds than the top speeds (I would hope obviously :D).

 

Sub with hydroplane and jetengine though.

Probably runs on Red Bull or something.

[lovelacebeer]

1 minute ago, LukkaiCH said:

Probably runs on Red Bull or something.

They will probably save themselves time and just add the Ekranoplan as the Soviet super submarine. 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

19 minutes ago, Karkong_the_Impaler said:

 

They put steam turbines into the K class so they were able to keep up with surface ships.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_May_Island

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine

 

That sure ended well...

 

19 minutes ago, Karkong_the_Impaler said:

 

Maybe remove subs higher than tier 3 and make a game mode for them where they have to sneak up on liberty ship bots all day long?

 

Submarine play is, or it should be, fundamentally different from surface warship play (and carrier play, for that matter), but WG has chosen to disagree. There might be a way to integrate everything successfully, but so far the solution has eluded the devs, and I'm not entirely sure they are even interested in finding it.

[LukkaiCH]

Vor 5 Minuten, lovelacebeer sagte:

They will probably save themselves time and just add the Ekranoplan as the Soviet super submarine. 

Of course that thing wouldn't even manage a full turn on Ocean, if you catch my drift. :D

[Karasu_Browarszky]

4 minutes ago, LukkaiCH said:

Of course that thing wouldn't even manage a full turn on Ocean, if you catch my drift. :D

 

We could also get some crossovers to spice up the action.

 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

The subs speeds as introduced by this flop of a design team made sure cruiser and DD's fail as prime sub hunters and forced the introduction of a magical call instant square bombing airstrike feature for everyone but the actual sub hunting classes. That's not even suspending disbelief, that's basically disney fantasy levels of immersion and game modeling failure.

[Bland_42]

4 ore fa, Europizza ha scritto:

That's not even suspending disbelief, that's basically disney fantasy levels of immersion and game modeling failure.

I would have called it plain stupidity... but that's only my opinion.