Ramming - A legitimate tactic?

[DumbleDerp]

So.....

 

Coming from another discussion, I wanted to ask you all what you thought about using your ship to ram another (hopefully enemy) ship as a legitimate tactic.

 

From my own experience it is clearly down to the situation in which I find myself.

 

Two examples that I've had first hand.

 

The battle has just begun and I come around (in my Chester cruiser) an island to see two enemy battleships coming right at me. After my brown trouser moment I have no choice but steer between the two ships to avoid hitting them. The two battleships obviously pound me close to death, but then one of them made a sharp turn and rams right into me - I had barely any health left and as the rammee sank like a stone. The rammer loses a great deal of health and then dies to the backup that finally arrives. Now I was clearly in a bad position and should never have raced ahead without support. However, for the trade off, I'm not sure ramming me was worth what he could have achieved with another volley plus keeping all his health. If I'd of been carrying torpedoes I could fully understand the need for a quick insta-death ram.

 

The other example came at the end of a game playing in my battleship which was quick frankly in a really bad position. Most of my team were relaxing at the bottom of the sea. I had a battleship in front on me, two cruisers coming up behind and a destroyer and torpedo planes heading right for me. Low health, so I went full ahead and rammed the BB in front on me, taking him with me. At the time, having considered the options, that was the only positive thing I could have done for my team. Then starts the general moaning and calling of "suicide noob" and that's from my own team. From my point of view, that was my only option.

 

I wanted to see what everyone else thought or whether you had any good or bad examples of rams and in what situations (and yes I've have plenty of friendlies that have cozied up to my ship too).

[Silviu90]

When you are alone in a bad position and dont have any other way to escape , rammig remains the best solution to end the game with a kill. you did good to ram him it was the only option you can have in that moment.

 

My self im using this "last option" when im alone in one side and my team is camping on the other side ... in my opinion ramming must be the last option in a good way and in a bad way if you can't get out of there  just ram them.

[GiantGianni]

I think that when you are the only one left and badly outnumbered. ramming is not the solution. It's all about chances. At the start both teams have let's say 50% chance. When you are left alonje and badly outnumbered you might have a 5% chance. If you ram to throw that 5% away. The 5% percent might seem like an unwinnable battle, but it's not 0%. You can still win. So why not try?

[Eviscerador]

As in the real warfare, it is a desperate measure in desperate conditions.

 

I think it is legit.

[Boomer7]

Well ramming has not been a valid tactic in sea battles since the greeks and romans roamed the sea.

It was used as long as galleys and galleons  were in use, but with the invention of better cannons noone really used it except as a desperation tactic.

The only time I know that it was used in more modern times was the battle of Lissa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_%281866%29

 

In WWII I know only that destroyers tried and successful rammed submarines.

 

The fact is unless you build a ship for ramming and strengthen its bow, even a battleship ramming a destroyer would be probably so heavily damaged that it would at best be able to limp back to port after that action.

[DumbleDerp]

I think that when you are the only one left and badly outnumbered. ramming is not the solution. It's all about chances. At the start both teams have let's say 50% chance. When you are left alonje and badly outnumbered you might have a 5% chance. If you ram to throw that 5% away. The 5% percent might seem like an unwinnable battle, but it's not 0%. You can still win. So why not try?

 

I should set the scene a little better. In the example I give, I was on fire, holed, and most modules knocked out, including rudder control. It was literally a case of just die or ram the guy and take him with me. 

[Silviu90]

I think that when you are the only one left and badly outnumbered. ramming is not the solution. It's all about chances. At the start both teams have let's say 50% chance. When you are left alonje and badly outnumbered you might have a 5% chance. If you ram to throw that 5% away. The 5% percent might seem like an unwinnable battle, but it's not 0%. You can still win. So why not try?

 

You dont ram them with out shooting them ... you still able to shot or even kill someone and then ram to the ship

[luckymarine]

A legitimate tactic that I tend to use as a measure of last resort.

 

Doing 38000 ramming damage and sending a Kongo to the bottom of the sea when your own only had 5000 health left and was being focussed on then your team has profited from that exchange. 

 

Its the exact reason why I steer away from badly damaged ships.

[SGT_BIG_JOEY]

Ramming is perfectly valid, even sensible, as a weapon of last resort. If death is certain then you can force a better trade by turning your ship into a giant torpedo and smashing it into the nearest enemy.

[Silviu90]

Use the ramming as a last resort when the battle is very bad ..

[Major__Klutz]

Use the ramming as a last resort when the battle is very bad ..

 

I agree. Taking out an opponent with only a few livepoints left and under fire is a good strategy, when there is no escape. If you are being sunk and you take the opponent with you, why not?

[Psychological_Warfare]

I absolutely agree that ramming is not a common strategy but a good way to make a "last move" - BUT it should ONLY be the very last option. You should not drive into the enemy fleet from the start with the plan in your head to ram at any costs.

 

I myself had the situation that i was outnumbered in my Kongo 1:3 against 3 other battleships. After exchanging massive fire, i was down to 5k health and rammed the enemy Fuso who made a mistake by being at the map border close to me. It had 2/3 HP left and i sunk him by ramming while being on fire and just seconds away from death myself.

[ilhilh]

I have to agree that it is legitimate and a valid tactic when used appropriately.  Just last night I rammed an enemy 75%+ health Kongo with my badly damaged Kongo and took us both down.  It was very situational, and he really should have avoided it... but he didn't.  At the time it was me +1 BB against 3 BB.  We had fairly hammered 1 BB down to a fraction of his health and I was still concentrating on him as I died.  This left our BB to kill the low health one and then it was an even fight number wise.

 

But, just because it is legitimate and valid in the right situations doesn't mean that there won't be plenty of people who do it in the wrong situations...

[DBaron]

Well ramming has not been a valid tactic in sea battles since the greeks and romans roamed the sea.

It was used as long as galleys and galleons  were in use, but with the invention of better cannons noone really used it except as a desperation tactic.

The only time I know that it was used in more modern times was the battle of Lissa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_%281866%29

 

In WWII I know only that destroyers tried and successful rammed submarines.

 

The fact is unless you build a ship for ramming and strengthen its bow, even a battleship ramming a destroyer would be probably so heavily damaged that it would at best be able to limp back to port after that action.

Probably because most sane commanders had more respect for the lifes of their crew than the old Romans had, and sailors after the battle was over mostly tried to rescue the opponent.

 

In the game, I think it is a legitimate tactic IF you can accomplish something for your team, to balance the odds or give them an advantage of winning. If the game is lost anyway and you just want to take someone with you without accomplishing anything except giving the other guy repair bills, I would consider it a petty tactic.

[Victtorin]

I won a game thanks to a ram, it can deal insane dmg to both you and the enemy but if there isn't nothing else to do ramming can turn the tide.

[Fominator]

I still remember one game when a CV out of planes rammed a full HP BB, glorious. A shame that was before replays (and subject to NDA).

 

Ramming is legit unless you do it "for fun xD".

[conductiv]

Probably because most sane commanders had more respect for the lifes of their crew than the old Romans had, and sailors after the battle was over mostly tried to rescue the opponent.

 

In the game, I think it is a legitimate tactic IF you can accomplish something for your team, to balance the odds or give them an advantage of winning. If the game is lost anyway and you just want to take someone with you without accomplishing anything except giving the other guy repair bills, I would consider it a petty tactic.

 

well since credit and experience gains are tied to your damage output, I guess ramming, even if the battle is already lost and you are the last guy standing is a valid last resort.

 

You can't really ram to spite the enemy..you are either doing something daft and trade your high HP count for less return, ending the battle with poor results..or wiser and use it when all is lost to gain extra credits/exp. you shouldn't care about the other guys garage/port economy 

[OldGrandad]

It is legitimate because you can, plain and simple. And as previously replies state it can turn the proverbial tide of defeat into the calm of a win.

[Psychological_Warfare]

It is legitimate because you can, plain and simple. And as previously replies state it can turn the proverbial tide of defeat into the calm of a win.

 

Thats definitely a horrible statement. You "can" teamattack your teammates. You "can" decide to go afk. Do NOT use that as an argument, please^^

[2ndaryBattleTank]

Of course ramming is a valid tactic. The joy of splitting some peskey destroyer in half. Ramming speed!

 

[GhostRiderLSOV]

I'm totally fine with it.

 

Just not when it happens with friendlies. Even though the "group hug" maneuver of 1 ship stuck on each side of one's tail is...funny looking.

[shrapnel_bait]

If your going down anyway, might as well do as much damage to an enemy as you can before you go, I tried it last night in my St Louis class cruiser, down to less than 300hp and being targeted by 2 battleships and another St Louis, decided to ram the cruiser, I got within about two ship lengths from the cruiser when I was finally sunk. What is annoying is that when I go from full ahead to full astern it takes forever to lose my forward momentum yet when I start to sink my ship comes to a dead halt in less than its own length, haven't the game developers taken momentum into account?, I was doing over 22 knots when I was sunk so unless my cruiser actually blew up, its wreckage should still have hit the enemy cruiser doing around 20 knots, but it just stopped moving almost immediately.

[GhostRiderLSOV]

Well, the insta-sink is to get dead ships out of the sea, as fast as possible.

 

I haven't seen if I can collide with one that's just sunk, but I guess the main reason is that, cleaning the area.

[WhiskeyWolf]

My two euro cents on this issue as I was forced yesterday to intentionally ram twice, which was a first for me.

 

One was the situation where I was rushing to defend the base cap against a Mogami in my Aoba and with support from a Division carrier (driven by Asukamaru , thanks btw), I considered we had good odds. Still, as I was closing the planes reviled two additional enemy BB's trailing the CA something like 10km astern. Basically, we were screwed and I was first in line into the meat-grinder. Still, we do what we must and I engaged the CA more closely. As the distance between us was getting smaller we were firing at each other as fast as the guns could cycle. My Aoba was doing its best but the favor was shifting into Mogami's corner. At that point the overall tactical situation was unclear to me - besides the fact the enemy CVs had the advantage - so I didn't know if my team was losing or wining.

 

What was clear was the fact I was doomed... so I decided to make it count for the team and set a ramming course for the Mogami, who by that time had noticeably more hp then me. My only regret is I couldn't see the other guys face when I plowed into his broadside at the height of the catapult and sunk us both. We lost but at that point I intended to win.

[BoomerDog9]

Well ramming has not been a valid tactic in sea battles since the greeks and romans roamed the sea.

It was used as long as galleys and galleons  were in use, but with the invention of better cannons noone really used it except as a desperation tactic.

The only time I know that it was used in more modern times was the battle of Lissa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_%281866%29

 

In WWII I know only that destroyers tried and successful rammed submarines.

 

The fact is unless you build a ship for ramming and strengthen its bow, even a battleship ramming a destroyer would be probably so heavily damaged that it would at best be able to limp back to port after that action.

 

Ramming was used in the U.S. Civil War. The CSS Virginia's first target in the Battle of Hampton Roads, the USS Cumberland, fell victim to the Virginia's ramming prow after receiving her close-range cannon-fire. The prow was damaged and ripped off as the Virginia extricated itself following the ramming maneuver. The Cumberland sank, and the Virginia continued to wreak havoc on the rest of the small US squadron anchored nearby, though it had developed a leak in the bow.

 

Whether or not ramming was used that often, the fact was that it remained a potential threat in close-quarters naval battles, enough so to influence the design of US Navy battleships to include ramming prows or ram-worthy bows. During Admiral Callaghan's night cruiser action vs. Japanese surface ships, the combatants crept so close together before the shooting started that ramming could indeed have been tried, had a commander on either side of that engagement chosen to commit to that option. That particular battle was so chaotic, however, that no one could say for sure whose ships were whose, and after several sinkings, horrific shellings, and friendly-fire incidents, most captains present were more interested in ending that brutal and confused engagement rather than kick things up a notch with ramming techniques.

 

As far as World of Warships is concerned, yes, it is a very valid tactic. It is kind of a [edited]move (at least in the eyes of the recipient ;-) ), but valid and well in line with doing whatever it takes to get the job done. Twice I've used my Cleveland to ram and sink an enemy battleship (a mostly-full-health Warspite trying to creep by itself into the friendly CV's area of the map, and a mostly-full-health New Mexico defending its cap point against my teammate's DD whilst ignoring my presence a few moments too long), and trading a light cruiser for an enemy battleship is both a brilliant way to end your match, and a potential game-changer. You have to be in a frame of mind that's willing to instantly dismiss caution and self-preservation and take one for the team when an opportunity for ramming and eliminating a nearby goliath presents itself... but you also have to be on a potential collision-course vector already, and must have an idea of how to steer so as to cause a collision against a potentially resisting foe... If battleships don't want to die from 'outdated' ramming tactics, then they should learn to sail in well-maintained battle formations for protection against killer-Clevelands. :-D