Personally, if Gaijin accurately models them and their performance, subs honestly aren’t a very big deal as people seem to think they are. Submarines are DEVASTATING… to an unaware, and off guard opponent. They are also VERY weak to depth charges, very slow under the water, must surface if any breach is made, lest it sinks, which it is extremely prone to do, as it is designed to be able to easily go under the water, while ships are not. Torpedoes aren’t very effective unless you are close to an opponent, in which case they will have to stay still if you want to hit them with any consistency, and if a ship does indeed move, you will hardly have any chance of lining up with its new trajectory, as your torpedoes are only forward facing, they aren’t zippy like torpedo boats, which are far more likely to get the jump on you if you’re in a close quarters area than a sub is going to get on you if you’re in big open waters. All in all, subs will likely have such a little impact on the game, that they might as well not be added instead of not being added because they would ruin naval.
Agreed. When a ship is fully aware of the presence of a sub, especially if that ship is a destroyer, sub chaser, etc., usually the surface ship has the upper hand.
As spotting goes, the game’s water is clear enough to see the keel of some ships. So it may be that if a sub were in the water, it may be visible at certain depths, in certain waters on certain maps in certain weather. You could also add bubbles on the surface behind the sub if it’s running near full power while under.
As sensors go, not all ships will have them, have good or bad ones, etc.
Different sub classes have different protections.
I think the variables and cat and mouse could be very cool.
Final thought, a new game mode. Sub-chasing
8 surface/air/sub vs 2 sub
They might be viable in RB because of the limited number of torps they would have, but then they would just be the new farm bots and instead of fleets of moffetts and frank knox’s it will be fleets of subs, if they are added, then it should be in manner similar to planes as a back up with SP required to use them
So just like Bombers and hopefully Carriers, Limit them to 4 of them per match.
the problem with limits is then it opens up the can of worms of putting limits on the arguably more powerful ships like Battleships and missile boats, Submarines would be more like the Type 93 of Naval if Naval stays in it’s current form, likely to miss and when it does hit, it doesn’t damage anything worthwhile and is only a nuisance
Your argument infers just what us bomber players want which is for the 4 bomber limit to dissappear now aswell. But again balancing wise that doesn’t work, but it’s the best option that currently exists already ingame. Other than the devs making a Bomber PVE mode for us bombers players to allow more bombers in future. So you could make also a Submarine PVE mode.
" Balancing " arguments aside, I don’t believe this is workable in multi-spawn modes - in Air RB it 's only possible since all players only have the one plane they’re queuing w/ to use in the match, so the MM only needs to sort teams to have smaller numbers of players w/ the non-limited spawning for a given BR once the limited-spawn vehicles queuing reaches the max-per-match.
Modes w/ respawns have atleast three times as many vehicles in the queue to the number of players, it 's easy to predict that attempting to apply limitations on a vehicle class in them would severely restrict the generation of new matches.
I think submarines will be a great addition to the game and balancing can indeed be done: Remember the ship launched floatplanes that is only good for capturing points? Just give them some anti submarine weapons and viola, balanced! Not to mention the snail can make money by having submarine premiums, which I think is possible bc they added battleship premiums. I think if they are to be added they might go in the coastal tree or maybe a separate tree. Maybe in bluewater tree (which i would really like). And also, another thing they can do to balance is to make torpedo launch only possible in periscope depth or surfaced depth, and also make submarine torpedoes extremely difficult to aim (like make the player do their own leading calculations and depth calculations) and also make dud torps to reduce the submarines effectiveness.
I feel you haven’t quite thought through your idea - how will those float planes locate submerged submarines?
Periscope waves coming out of the water, its really not that hard as we have to find asu57s in bushes in ground rb, and like i said, subs only launch torps at periscope depth or surfaced. And set specific spawn areas for subs so they would be easier to find, also make sub torps have terrible range. I see no flaws with that
Periscopes are smaller than PT boats, which already have a visibility function that means they are harder to see at moderate ranges.
Also there is no real world consideration that submarine torps have any shorter range than others.
And unless you’re patrolling with your little float plane and it’s 2 x 50kg bombs (if any) and ignoring your ship, it will never get to attack before the sub dives deeper…
Umm then have the torps to have a chance of recreating the USS tang incident, or make subs the equivalent of strike drones in ground RB where you have to get a ton of spawnpoints. And like i said make players do torpedo calculations in the periscope AND make it hard for them to spot our surface ships unless they surface (make waves splash into their periscope and give them small zoom)
So are you going to introduce unreliability for all US torpedoes in a time frame, or just subs?
And what time frame - in a game where there might be WW1 dreadnaughts fighting Korea War era jets?
WT is forever correcting sight zoom to historical levels - US and German submarines in WW2 had 1.5x and 6x zooms - Zoom of the Periscope? - SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Limited visibility from periscopes is certainly reasonable since they did not protrude far above the waves.
But again - you really haven’t thought this through much - you’ve just seized on a headline idea and are inventing stuff post hoc to make it “real”.
Basically submarines are just a rubbish idea for WT naval in its current form.
People bring 5 tanks to a ground battle and no SPAAG and then whinge about CAS spam, as if it is someone else’s responsibility to deal with them. The same will go for subs. IRL subs feared aircraft and destroyers - and for good reason. Pick up a book about U-boat crews and read it.
Subs will bring more balance to the game. They are incredibly slow and fragile, won’t have homing torpedoes, and will actually make destroyers valuable. Teams won’t be comprised of 90% battleships and heavy cruisers.
Subs need to be near-surface in order to use their periscope to attack. Planes will be able to see them when flying overhead.
I don’t think it 's that simple, they distract the player using them from their responsibilities fighting surface v. surface, are quite fragile, and are not present on all or a majority of ships.
More useful( and in line w/ their historical application ) might be expansion of the visual detection radius of the player ship employing them when the floatplane is active, it 'd only be an expansion of the mechanics of ship-to-ship datalinking that the Radio Room module provides, and we know that periscope detection is supported ingame already anyway
and also make submarine torpedoes extremely difficult to aim (like make the player do their own leading calculations and depth calculations) and also make dud torps to reduce the submarines effectiveness.
Neither of these artificial nerfs are really justified: the former doesn’t touch the effectiveness of the torpedo at the under-2km ranges where they become reliably effective regardless of launch platform, nor does it do anything to the effectiveness of torpedo attacks at longer ranges that are already counterable despite game-provided lead indication - the very long time-to-target of torpedo armament means that an attacked player has the ability to completely avoid the attack even w/o knowing that one may have been launched against them. It 's only a matter of conscious positioning, just as in gun duels.
Dud torpedoes make no sense at all, considering the unreliability of perfectly functional torpedoes already.
And set specific spawn areas for subs so they would be easier to find, also make sub torps have terrible range.
Spawn locations for all ship types on both teams are already marked, so that wouldn’t add anything which isn’t already present.
Again, it isn’t the range of a torpedo that makes it dangerous - just the level of awareness of the player being attacked by them.
They are incredibly slow and fragile, won’t have homing torpedoes, and will actually make destroyers valuable.
Subs need to be near-surface in order to use their periscope to attack.
The slowness and fragility absolutely, that 's actually one of the factors I believe could be used for submarines to find balance alongside large ( Bluewater ) ships, no specialized boats or MPA 's needed:
For the 1910 's to 1950 's submarines we’re likely to see first, the submerged speeds of the vessels are around or below even the attack barges already ingame. It 's the surfaced speeds that are comparable ( though not competitive ) to those of the slower large ship types.
Surfaced submarines are vulnerable to gunfire just as any currently present ship is, if not more. So the balancing of them against ships which do not have the capability to fight them while submerged seems to largely fall to the distance from map center they’re allowed to start from.
imo the destroyer/frigate spawn is appropriate on most maps, far enough away that a submarine could not outrun a dreadnought to the objective w/o being gun-engageable for that time, while also being close enough that the sub has a reasonable chance of getting into that <2km zone of effective torpedo engagement while opposing ships are still there.
The rest might or might not be relevant in the short term. Homing torpedoes did exist in the latter parts of WW2, and a number of surface vessels ingame already have them albeit w/o the " homing " functionality. Even w/o subs I could’ve seen that mechanic implemented as a intermediary between current straight-runners and missiles, a way of improving the hitrate at terminal phase w/o the additional advantage of low time-to-target, but recent discoveries seem to indicate missiles coming regardless.
The move towards modernity ( even VLS missiles have indications to be in the works ) would likely apply to submarines also, and w/ that comes underwater speeds high enough to keep pace w/ dreads removing the need to surface, and fire-control-systems advanced enough to aim even dumbfire torps while submerged having the same effect.
WT Mobile, though having some significant differences in modelling of mechanics, has and does share the visual models which form vehicles w/ WT - their submarine additions are on the cusp of teardrop hulls and nuclear propulsion already.
Though probably not relevant soon, it 's that kind of advanced capability vehicle which I imagine would likely require specific anti-sub weapons to engage - lucky, then, that we have ships equipping such weapons represented up to the 1970 's already present.
I mean, if you pick up a book about U-boats, you will probably get the impression that subs generally avoided surface engagements like the plague and stuck to convoy raiding nearly all the time. Maybe there’s a reason for this.
Not sure that many people are going to want to spawn in a destroyer when they can get vaporised whenever any other ship on the map sneezes in their general direction. Plus, people said this for WoWs too. It didn’t work.
Subs don’t belong in the game, period.
WT Mobile confirms their introduction of British submarines:
Somewhat unexpected that they’re starting w/ the V-class, as it did not use the 102mm Mk.XXIII deck gun or the Type M Mk.2 tube-launched mine which are in the files here in the base game.
Yes on submarines from me. Theres a million already stated above reasons they would work perfectly in WT.
It 's happening ?!