#How are sub vs ship battles supposed to be balanced
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Subs get to pick their fights and ships usually don’t
The ratio of sub wins to ships wins really depends on the ship the sub was facing
good point
another factor is that people rarely use lower-level subs which makes people think that all subs are very good, when in reality its because the subs are high-leveled to start with
at almost every level, subs have the advantage over ships of the same level.
skipjack beats all lvl 5 ships, and most lvl 6 except for essex. akula beats all lvl 6 ships and lvl 7 except for essex. ohio beats all lv 7 and 8 ships except for kirov. yasen beats all lvl 8 and 9 ships except for kirov.
it’s clear that subs can fairly easily beat almost all ships at or above their level. ships on the other hand struggle against ships of higher levels
i dont think yasen beats all lvl 8 and 9
It does easily with the exception of kirov
kirov is the only ship that can beat every sub in the game
it doesnt get 1 shotted if you turn
ships sonar are worse than subs, and subs are faster so they can get under you
also a sub can always just chill under a rig and the essex can't do anything
Yasen can have a hard time with Yamato
The 4 planes can put in a shift
Straight up untrue, Moskva is nasty to face unless you’re in an akula or Seawolf
You have to unload everything from a distance and run for your life
akula, seawolf, yasen and ohio beat it no problem. so does 212 generally
moskva is terrible. it’s torpedoes get easily fooled by decoys, it’s slow, the helicopters bunch up so even 2 sams can kill them all, the sams are on turrets, and it get’s 1 shotted easily
i could be mistaken but i think that golf can also 1 shot it
but ofc moskva is better than golf
Forgot Ohio existed lol
i think this is just false
i mean if the moskva just sits there and lets you hit it right in the middle sure
well my point is that the moskva's hp is too low to make a good anti sub ship
yeah moskva needs a buff
it's very easy to 1 shot, and so any sub with a decoy can get right under it and 1 shot it
agreed
the only ships that can really pose a threat to subs are essex, kirov and sometimes yamato or iowa can be tricky
tuo is also surprisingly good
IMO tuo is better at anti-sub than moskva
tuo 
tuo can out run or out turn torpedoes
only issue is that it lacks a heli and the sams are canister launched
but i got up to 5k last time i used it, so it's fairly balanced. moskva is just pain
moskva would need like rocket torpedoes and anti-submarine mortar
it should also maybe get like a sonar buff or something
cause if it could spot subs early, then the hp wouldn't be too big of an issue
@quaint yarrow what do you think about moskva, and the whole sub vs ship debate?
can you summarize the debate please?
so basically, i'm arguing that subs are currently OP compared to surface ships because subs always perform better than ships at or above their level whereas ships struggle against those of higher levels. i think that decoys should get a slight nerf, and that diving time should be increased to make it harder to shoot down helicopters without getting hit by missiles. i also think that advanced ships like zumwatl and 055 should get a decoy. i think that moskva should get buffed too.
the other side of the argument says that subs are balanced and nothing should change.
subs always perform better than ships at or above their level
please explain your evidence for this claim
essentially every sub from lvl 5 onwards can easily beat ships at or above their level.
like for their levels, subs consistently perform exceptionally well compared to their ship counterparts
and decoys are unrealistically good. this can be checked by using a google search on how submarines avoid torpedoes
take skipjack for example. it beats every ship at lvl 5 with ease, and can do the same to all lvl 6 ships except for essex. however, all of the other lvl 5 ships such as burke and leander get destroyed by lvl 6 ships. this shows that subs perform better than other vessels of the same level and can even compete with those of higher ones
a winning lottery ticket beats a $100 bill with ease
are lottery tickets OP? perhaps not, because they're most likely to be losing tickets.
now replace lottery ticket with sub, and winning with being at the right place at the right time with enough weapons reloaded to sink a ship.
i think there's also the fact that many players who use subs to kill higher-level ships are often skilled, which increases the chances of success
if a noob started using skipjack to fight the kolkota i doubt they'd win
i don't see how that's a fair comparision
like another advantage of subs is that when they're low on hp or ammo, they can always run. a ship can't
my point is that judging ships as unbalanced if one beats the other in a 1v1 is not a fair comparison
but in the actual game subs have an even greater advantage because they avoid getting teamed on, can choose their engagements, and can run away more easily
like a 1 vs 1 is favorable for a ship
if sub X has an advantage, maybe you should play sub X? or is there something you prefer about surface ships?
well because it's unbalanced
subs are consistenly better than ships
even though there's no real world evidence to support this
to be clear, I'm willing to rebalance subs based on objective performance data like their average scores, which I keep track of. I've nerfed subs in the past and may do so in the future.
but I'm skeptical of balancing arguments based on 1v1 situations
like why are decoys so good?
they're only good if you disable active sensors, which many players forget to do
but 1 vs 1 situations is ideal for a ship because it doesn't risk getting temed on, and the sub can't run
lol no they still work most of the time when full speed and sensors on
isnt your argument that subs can in fact run?
yes that's what i'm saying
because squirrel is arguing that i'm basing everything off of a 1 vs 1 situation, but a 1 vs 1 takes away some of the subs advantages
in game subs are even more OP than in a 1 vs 1
i just tried it on watersource and the decoys still work when the sub is moving at full speed towards the ship with sensors on
i just tested it with an akula heading towards a burke at full speed with sensors off and after firing all torpedoes (for maximum noise). the akula dropped 1 decoy and all 6 mk54 torpedoes went towards the decoy
i'll try it on the surface now to make even more noise
im pretty sure noise coming from torps is while you're firing the torps
ok time to test that too
like this?
like even that time, the decoy still worked
and akula is like the noisiest sub, right?
here, i tried it with kolkata to see if the set65 is better than mk54. i also fired torpedoes after the decoy to see if that would change anything.
in every trial, the akula (which has no stealth) still manages to decoy the torpedoes even when running full speed towards the target with sensors on and weapons firing
and when surfaced
I cannot guarantee things work the same on watersource, which is a 3rd party modded server based on an old version of the game.
alright, thanks!
also just to confirm, is akula the loudest sub with decoys?
Ohio?
that would probably be Ohio (if below ~20kn) or Yasen (if above ~20kn)
oh wait you have to level up right
yeah, it will take me a few minutes
i can xp farm
probably mk48
but like ship launched
DNLPKK if u want to join btw
doesnt seem to work
sorry, DLNPKK
@quaint yarrow
on party room, yasen full speed, sensors on, weapons fired, sub surfaced
can confirm
hmm, interesting, it's not exactly intended behavior
somehow it works differently when I play in a real situation
i guess there is some randomness in decoys
but usually i need to disable sensors
everytime i play, i often get the result i got
the loudest sub, at full speed while firing with sensors on and surfaced still decoys torpedoes
this would also apply to all other subs
i'll put a slight decoy nerf on my TODO list. only slight.
cause yasen is loudest
thank you!!!!!!
they're too good lol
and what are your thoughts on diving time?
oh, and the addition of decoys to zumwalt and 055?
It can’t outrun mk48s, not by a long shot
So speed does impact stealth?
moving makes noise detectable on enemy passive sonar
it also reduces your passive sonar's abilities
Is there a graph for this or is it just above a certain speed you’re no longer silent
I feel like 212 should be nigh undetectable when under 4 knots but slightly less stealthy than a Seawolf when at full speed
Like irl
4 knots? That’s practically useless
Also why would it be less stealthy than seawolf at full speed
It’s slower at full speed than seawolf
212 stealth running mode is 4kn and less. seawolf is 20 kn and less
It doesn’t really make sense for the game though
wdym?
212 is lvl 7, seawolf is lv 9
the issue is that this game doesn’t really allow for much realism because of the way it’s structured.
like if you wanted true realism you would have to have something similar to netquel where ships of different eras would be separated
but that would probably destroy the game
i also just realised that the sams on the 212 are launched from torpedo tubes
@quaint yarrow what do you think about increasing diving time, buffing moskva, and giving zumwalt and 055 decoys?
I REALLY don’t want diving time increased
Moskva buff and decoys for zum and 055 would be welcome
the current diving time makes subs with sams crazy good
even just a 1 or 2 second increase would help
They only have two though (I’m not counting 212 because its SAMs are awful)
If you put your helis right on top of the sub when it surfaces it’s really hard to hit them
but you can’t get that close in the first place cause they shoot it down
That’s why it has 10(!) set 65s
those torps get decoyed easily
like moskva is really bad lol
a 1 second addition to diving time won’t make subs unplayable
because again, subs are currently better than ships. these changes would balance it to make them more even
only if you use them wrong tbh
if im an ohio and a kirov shoots all 8 of its missiles at me but i cant dive
that will make it unplayable
subs shouldn’t be cruising on the surface
they’re made to hide underwater . not straddle the surface
plus it’s very unrealistic
i would prefer to have some amount of awareness of whats going on in the game
well 1 second won’t wreck it
but it would keep subs at close range from surfacing and shooting down helis
also you can always just time it so you click r just before you surface to reduce time on the surface
kinda like pre-diving
1 second is quite a long time
also whats the point of sub SAMs at all if you do this?
sure, subs should probably get nerfed a bit but it seems that all of these together will just make subs useless
sams will still be useful. it just takes more slill
and the point is because subs are currently much better than ships. these proposed changes would increase balance and realism
how does "more skill" make SAMs usable
sams won’t be better
because you can pre dive
when you are surfacing, click r before you break the surface. this will reduce your time above water
you still cant use sams in this case?
this essentially forces subs to spend nearly all time udnerwater
how would you know if you're close to them in the first place if you're submerged?
no you can cruise surfaced and then when missiles come by u dive
3 seconds is enough time
is it?
yes
also subs are meant to be submerged
not to be played like surface vessels
but if people seem to be worried about balance, then what if dive time is increased to 2.5 seconds?
so an added half second
what does that change?
slight nerf to diving time
so subs can still see incoming missiles when far out, but must stay underwater when close
it’s like a compromise
isnt this already the case?
if you surface when near another ship ur kinda dead
I think I am a bit late to the debate but lemme voice my own opinions.
Firstly, if we are comparing subs with ships, we need to compare ppl of similar skill levels:
- A new sub user would usually lose to a new ship user, as subs are more fragile, and require some skill to use
- A skilled sub user vs a skilled ship user might go various ways, depending on what the ships are. For eg., Owl made a claim that a Kolkata would lose against a skipjack. I am sorry but then the kolkata is a horrible player. A Kolkata, while having only 4 torps, has an insane torp reload time, and can just chug on while spamming trops and take cover. The skippy will die due to lack of decoys. Another of Owl's claims, that a Essex would lose because a sub can one shot only happens if, to be put frankly, is very new. Any decently experienced user would use the planes as a scout/patrol, and the planes dropping torps would alert it. Another argument was about the Moskva. While I agree that it needs to be strengthened, one overlooks the power of the helis, and the fragility of the subs. A sub needs to surface to shoot SAMs, excepting the new one whose name I forgot. By the time it surfaces, usually the helis would have shot one salvo at the least. I do not know if you are familiar with depth mechanics, but the sub will get hit with far more certainty. Even if all 4 are shot down, the sub will e on critical health, and furthermore, evade a large no. of normal torps and helis. Also, any good anti- sub player would NOT fire the entire salvo at the same time, rather, it will fire 1 or 2 at a time,, and the sub will be faced with a relentless wave of torps coming at it.
I can clarify about depth mechanics if required.
Ah I need to yap on a little more:
- Why do people feel that they get killed by subs more than ships?
- Firstly, in lower levels, that is not the case.
- Secondly, if one looks at fleets, most actually use ships. But you may say that fleets are a different matter, as fleets of anything outnumber you.
- So, the final question is why does one get killed by subs more often, when the enemy is a solo sub rather than a solo ship? There are multiple reasons:
- Solo ships get picked off quite fast by other vessels. Subs usually can hide more efficiently.
- Pros usually use subs when going solo. In ships, one may advance far faster, but since you are vulnerable, you might die. Subs you can hide better in.
- These pros usually have learnt how to use subs well, by long practice.
- Half the ships don't know how to counter subs, I am not wanting to be rude so pleaaase pardon me, but its true.
Subs are hard to learn how to use compared to ships. they also have weaknesses. However, few people know how to exploit these weaknesses:
- Subs have less health.
- Subs usually have low reload, eg the ohio after one salvo takes eons to reload.
- One needs to merely survive the first salvo. To do this:
a> Make the torps hit the fronts and sides of the ships.
b> Fire torps slowly around/in front for detection. Plane/heli patrols also work well. - One needs to know how to fire the torps. Firing a full salvo would mean your doom. Rather, fire one or two at one time slowly, letting them reload. Also, to maximise the time for the sub to be worn down, speed away from the sub, making its torps hit the back of your ship, and it being forced to go right into your torps to pursue.
There are more methods but I can't remember them n the top of my head so for now, this is it.
Base note for those not willing to the huge paras, subs are not unkillable, just learn how to kill 'em.
Lottery tickets would be OP if 100 ppl won each lotery
When there are 2 types of characters x and y and a player using a x beats another player using a y at the same level 9 times out of 10 i do not see how that game could be balanced
player who has played for a year will know if X is op and will use X
a player who found the game yesterday wont know X is op and will use Y because they think it looks cool
For a guy who has found the game yesterday, X will be horrible too. Subs are not super easy to learn. For new players, ships are better.
wdym?
interesting point of view! i do agree that subs take more skill to learn at first, but once you do, they have greater potential than ships. my point about skipjack vs kolkata is that a skipjack has a greater chance of beating a kolkata than a burke, or a leander. i’m trying to argue that subs perform well against vessels of both their own and higher levels, while ships struggle in uptiers. also, the skipjack can severely damage the kolkata, and then create seperation until it rearms. unlike subs who can dive and run away, the kolkata is left exposed and an easy target for third parties. this is a major advantae of aubs in that they can choose their engagements and can damage ships to the pointwhere it’s very easy for third parties to sink them.
for the essex, i did say that it poses a peoblem for most subs. if look back at some of my original messages, i claimed the essex and kirov as exceptions to the general rule of of subs being better. however, you can’t patrol all of the waters with essex, and subs lurking under rigs are immune to you. but the essex is a good match against subs. as for the moslva, an issue os that if it spot you from far out the subs have time to shoot down the helis. if the sub remains submerged then the moslva will struggle to spot it because of its slow helicopters that can’t cover much ground, and sub-par sonar. when the occurs, it’s basically dead.
i agree with many of your other points, but would like to say that although subs generally take more skill, one could argue that ships actually take a lot of skill to play well. like i would argue that being a solo ship takes more skill than a solo sub because of how many diaadvantages ship have when solo. ships are also much more diverse with many different play styles when compared to subs. these take time to learn. overall i still think that decoys need a nerf because of how good they are, just watch my vids for proof. i also think that diving time should be increased by 0.5 seconds.
and that moslva should get a buff, and that modern ships like 055 and zumwalt should get decoys
Wasnt talking about subs
but if X is harder to learn to use and it is OP than thats more detrimental for new players
Because older players will know that its op and will use it to bully new players but when new players try to use it then they will still get killed