Can't wait to see Jingles' reaction when WG adds premium Sub-Carrier hybrids

@nazamroth8427

11 ай бұрын

You know the worst thing about that? It would be more realistic than most of their current releases. The I-400 did exist. Unlike things like that russian battleship. Ushakov, i think it was? I wish I had hard stats for its size because im pretty sure it would sink from all the armor it has... Edit: I got some stats since then. Assuming it does not sink, it has to have a conventional ship hull shape with a draft of about 20-25 meters. Good luck with that.

@MikHavel

11 ай бұрын

Or submarine with cruiser calibre guns!

@NoName-sb9tp

11 ай бұрын

Ah yes, the I-400. We can also wait for WG to add the Cruiser Submarine Surcouf with 2 8' guns and separate trainable torpedo tubes at the aft bow.

@drrocketman7794

11 ай бұрын

​@MikHavel there was a submarine that had a battleship gun...

@ahseaton8353

11 ай бұрын

Shhhh! They are listening!!

The only submerged sub vs sub kill in WW2 wasnt accidental but lady luck definitely played her hand. HMS Venturer encountered a german u-boat and the captain did all the math involved in the firing solution by hand himself, no computer or anything. They fired a spread of 4 torpedoes, 3 along the predicted path but the last one was fired along a guestimated trajectory if the u-boat dived. And thats what it did. It avoided the first three torpedoes but the errant 4th one hit home and the u-boat sank with all hands. So yeah, it wasnt by accident but a bit of skill and and some serious luck

@Fizwalker

11 ай бұрын

Not the only time a submarine Vs submarine kill in WWII. Spring of 1942, a Japanese submarine caught the Dutch sub O-16 on the surface and sent a single torpedo that sank the Dutch sub.

@hammer1349

11 ай бұрын

@Fizwalker my apologies, should have specified submerged. Venturer herself also sank U-771 while the u-boat was on the surface earlier in the war

@kristoffermangila

11 ай бұрын

And now the present residents of the nearby island where the U-boat sank are worrying about all the corroding containers of mercury it carried.

@gamarus0kragh

11 ай бұрын

There were a number of subs that was sunk by torpedoes when caught on the surface by another submarine, but only the one submerged kill you mention. I found a page that put the number of U-boats at 24 sunk by submarines, most in the North Sea and the Med. I know of one Dutch sunk by a Japanese sub near Singapore/Malaysia. I haven't found such a convenient list for the other major navies, but skimming the list of British sub losses, I get 5, with a 6th likely. 1 lost to friendly fire, 1 sunk by an Italian sub (guns/torps) and 3 or 4 by German U-boats.

@simsch97

11 ай бұрын

​@@gamarus0kraghI've got a nice book about german u-boat history and there is a list ob submarines sunk by german u-boats and a list of german u-boats sunk by allied submarines. According to that it is 21 german u-boats sunk by allied subs and 10 allied subs sunk by german u-boats.

Jingles Jingles Jingles, no solo warrior unless it is 1v4 and you win in randoms. But appreciate the entertainment as always!

@wombat4191

11 ай бұрын

Pretty sure it applies to ranked as well.

@JLewisRacing927

11 ай бұрын

@@wombat4191 it does, it’s actually 1 v 1/4th of the team.

@ujjwal7502

11 ай бұрын

​@@JLewisRacing927wouldn't that make it 1v3 in randoms?

Submarines, the shadow government and the USS salmon sounds like the start of a fascinating conspiracy theory

@Frigidblood

11 ай бұрын

Sounds like part of a Carnac the Magnificent gag.

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

Sounds like it was taken from the movie Down Periscope! 😂

Wargaming: "I reject your reality and substitute my own"

@nickierv13

11 ай бұрын

WG: "We reject our reality and..." Hydro doesn't work vs subs but will work through islands. But only at some depths.

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

A Savage comment! 😂

@nickierv13

11 ай бұрын

@@paulvamos7319 *sigh* 🙃

@tba113

11 ай бұрын

​@@paulvamos7319 [golf clap] Well played.

I miss the way cvs were played before the rework. I liked how tou had to have a plan to attack and had to be more careful of planes because once they were gone they were not coming back

An underwater duel only happened once ( U 864 against Venturer). But there were some subs which were torpedoed on the surface. K XVI for example was sunk by I 66.

@jamesbuckner4791

11 ай бұрын

The Americans figured out how to hunt Japanese subs relatively decently by the end of the war as well

@Thunder-54321

11 ай бұрын

And to add an ackshually Jingles it wasn't accidental either, Venturer was attempting to intercept U-864, initially stalking it and waiting for it to surface, when it didn't and Venturer was running low on battery power they opted to attempt to attack it underwater. It was known to be theoretically possible, just extremely difficult.

The single biggest point of ‘ok that’s a load of crap’ for me is when a sub takes a torp or two or gets smothered by HE and just shrugs it off and dives

@TimboMacDW

11 ай бұрын

Or is over-penned by 18 inch shells. 🧐 that's an 18 inch hole going into your sub and a 25 inch or more, coming out? Yer just gaffa tape that up as we dive underwater. 😂😂

@gamarus0kragh

11 ай бұрын

@@TimboMacDW well it _could_ have hit a diveplane or the periscope or some other purely exterior fitting.. but the shockwave of a ton of shell nicking the hull and hitting the water at 500m/s (yes, supersonic in air) should transmit enouh energy into the hull to in some cases sink it outright.

@Frigidblood

11 ай бұрын

And the way saturation mechanics work on submarines. Damage saturation is supposed to represent a part of the ship being so full of holes that more hits to the same spot don't do much. Submarines saturate faster than most ships, which makes some sense because they're not armored. However, being so full of holes that subsequent artillery hits don't have anything to hit and damage means you're still A-OK to dive in WoWS.

@PreceptorGrant

11 ай бұрын

Much the same could be said of other classes too. I think it's just an artifact of a videogame with slightly arcade mechanics and hit points instead of a realism damage model.

@ShiningDarknes

11 ай бұрын

@@PreceptorGrant Ships are quite buoyant, a few dozen large holes in the hull may cause it to take on water but as long as you seal up the bulkheads in those areas the ship can only flood so much, still far more air than steel and water so they stay floating. Just think of all the battleships that were not detonated take thousands of shells and dozens of torpedoes and bombs to still not completely sink until the whole hull cracks and the ship tears apart. Subs do not have this luxury, they don't have than many compartments that can be sealed off while still having access to core compartments like the engines, bridge, and torpedo bays. You take a big hit that somehow doesn't tear you in half midship and half of the ship is suddenly inaccessible until you surface _if_ you can surface. Subs do not belong in this game which is evident by just how unrealistic they are in comparison to the normal ships (which while not realistic either at least behave like real ships in their speed, maneuverability, and ruggedness)

Solo warrior........ for surviving a 1 against 4.... Oh Jingles, never change 🙂

"dodging sub torps is easy" said shadowgovernment, as he launched yet another set of underwater aim-7 sparrows

How could he sink so low 🙂

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

😂 You knew it was going to happen sometime! Why not get it taken care of now! 🤣 What if this becomes a yearly thing like War Thunder? 😮 😱 👍

@liberalsockpuppet4772

11 ай бұрын

He's really hit bottom.

@StarkRaven59

11 ай бұрын

Perhaps you forget this is Jingles, who managed to Jingles Landing a submarine on the ocean floor and then dig it free. I miss that series.

I was in my Jäger a few days ago and a Salmon player somehow managed to not only outrun me and the other ship on our side of the map, but stay submerged nearly the entire time. We won the battle, but I still managed to lose karma points and get called a horrible player by the players that died in the first few minutes. It was great.

@firehawkdelta

11 ай бұрын

Oh, yes. Happens regularly, especially when the sub is higher-tiered. In a DD or CL, I get outspotted *and* outrun, while the sub keeps me spotted and just spams pings and torpedoes until I die. Can't close in, can't run away... *really* "fun and engaging", WG!

Me (watching replay): Wow, 33.2 kts when surfaced (Checks Wikipedia): Max surface speed 21 kts Me: WTAF

@pikkozoikum8523

11 ай бұрын

Ye, though this game has unrealistic mechanics to make the game playable. Just look at DDs, they get only 10% penetration dmg from AP, which makes no sense, but also they can't get "critical damage" like other ships via "citadel hit". While larger ships have a citadel armor to protect the vulnerable parts, a Destroyer has vulernable parts, but no citadel. This is a logic, that makes no sense. It's "Large Ships have more armor, that's why they take more dmg", but in realitiy, Destroyer would take massive dmg, when hitting the spots, where other ships have citadells. DDs lack in the protection, not in the vulnerable parts

@libraeotequever3pointoh95

11 ай бұрын

BB's repair party, hydro and radar functioning through islands, and etc. The fact is that realism is not a priority in the arcade game known as World of Warships.

@bmen6401

11 ай бұрын

@@libraeotequever3pointoh95 Fact!

@Arisudev

11 ай бұрын

​@@pikkozoikum8523ummm overpenetration is historically accurate though. This is why WW2 battleships and cruisers always carry at least 2 kinds of shells. One for use against heavily armored capital ships, and another for lightly armored ships. In one of Japan vs US battles, the severely undergunned US fleet managed to escape because Japanese BBs and CAs used heavy AP but US fleet only consisted of DDs and a light CV. It was featured in Drachinifel's video.

@pikkozoikum8523

11 ай бұрын

@@Arisudev I was not talking about overpenetration. When AP does a hit, it does 10% dmg against DDs, not 30%. The more critical point is, that ships can take 100% ap dmg, when hit the citadel. But if an AP hits the vital parts, it doesn't not 100%, it does not 30%, it does 10% dmg. This is just because to artificially balance DDs, that they are playable in this game. And that's why I can't understand, when someone comes up with "submarines are way faster than in reality" statements.

You missed one piece of odd physics: the Depth Charge. They only deal damage to Subs, even when on the surface but dont leave a scratch at anything else.

@alphax4785

11 ай бұрын

TBF, I'd say that just goes into the more bog standard, 'AP pens below waterline don't cause flooding because gameplay' reasoning.

@teebob21

11 ай бұрын

@@alphax4785 I sincerely miss that mechanic with all of my heart.

I think it's a shame Subs weren't a bit more realistic but were allowed to choose their starting location as a pay off. That way they would've had the ambush style play, but are also more fragile and sedentary.

@bmen6401

11 ай бұрын

Agree with your Starting Position idea

@PreceptorGrant

11 ай бұрын

Yes, but I think they're fragile enough already. They really can't stand up to much. You often see subs take a lot of depth charge 'hits' and keep going, but those are distant AoE hits. A close or direct hit will nuke half their health easy.

@will6465k

11 ай бұрын

@@PreceptorGrantso 20 full pens from 152mm ap.. is fine then?

@nighthowk117

11 ай бұрын

As a dd player i hate subs more then cvs, even thought CV suck whats more irritating is when you know where that fk sub is you cant do shit unless you suicide because, obviously there were no mortar deapth charges, or when youre in a cruiser pop a 5km sonar with sub around that range and no spot or if he fully submerges your Equipment that was literally created to spot subs acts as if it was useless piece of garbage.

@iankerridge5720

11 ай бұрын

@@nighthowk117 "Hedgehog" was a thing in WW2. it was a 24 piece spigot mortar firing contact fused depth charges of 30lb explosive warhead.

To add further context, Mk48 ADCAP (advanced capacity) torpedoes, the ones currently in use by most NATO allied nations, have a maximum speed of 55 knots. Spearfish torps, built and used by the British, do only 80.

"in order to use their homing torpedoes effectively first have to ping the target with their sonar" Well in World of Warships you often want to launch the torps first and then at the right time get a hit with the sonar..

@kuddles29

11 ай бұрын

Which is then ignored to shotgun a target anyway.

@PreceptorGrant

11 ай бұрын

Yep, send toprs out silently then ping later for a mid-course correction. I do that a lot.

I love the episodes where jingles has a massive axe to grind hahaha

The big gameplay problem with submarines is the massive skill ceiling. Someone who knows how to play submarines well can shadow a battleship or heavy cruiser all game long, never be detected, and eventually sink their target through volume of torpedoes if nothing else. Look at 'TheShadowGovernment' there. Spends most of their time on the surface or at periscope depth, and ends the battle with a full 3m 20s of air/submerge time. If it wasn't for the U-boat, that Iowa would never have seen the submarine that sunk it. If used correctly, submarines have no counterplay. They are faster than their primary targets, so one cannot outrun the attacker. They are at least as stealthy as destroyers, so you have no hope of finding one unless the sub makes a mistake. And unlike a destroyer, subs can attack even an evasive target, from the stern, without being seen. At least a stealth-torpedo DD has a harder time hitting a target that routinely changes course. And the window for firing torpedoes undetected shrinks or vanishes if the target flees. The only counterplay requires teamplay, and surviving teammates anywhere near you. The target needs to bait the submarine into the detection range of something stealthier than it is. Or at least near enough to a non-target so it can follow the sonar ping ripples. In the end, isn't the high skill ceiling why WG reworked carriers? A great player couldn't be stopped. A good or lesser player was basically an annoyance.

I was listening to a KZread video last night about the Dutch Subs in the Far East during the early days of the War in the Pacific, and one of the Dutch Subs was sunk by a IJN Sub, using Torpedoes. They were both on the surface. And I think that I had heard some US Subs sank IJN Subs again on the surface. But Submerged Sub on Sub was very difficult and really lucky without homing wire guided tropedoes that came well after WWII. The one thing I really noticed about today's Hero, is the fact that he rarely went below Periscope Depth. A Sub is a great scout, if you don't ping and stay near the surface. No one can she you when you are at Periscope Depth unless they are almost on top of you. It like yesterday WOT video with the Light Tank that sat in the bushes for the first 60% of the game, spotting for his division mate. Like a good DD player, who get forward, spot and don't use their guns, Subs can be very effective that way. To often I find Sub Drivers to aggressive and only interested in sinking other ships. Those ones are easy to kill. Last night while in a Hindy, I assisted 3 other ships (SUB, DD & Cruiser) in surrounding and sinking a Sub who pushed too far forward, too early and without any support. I assisted with my Hydro and even got to drop a couple of Depth Charges on him. (Hindy doesn't turn quick enough to be a real good Sub Hunter!) The DD got he kill. I agree that WOWS is a Game and an Arcade Game at that. Little is anywhere near realistic. Time is all messed up. Sea Battle take hours, sometimes days. Everything is speeded up and WOWS tries (sometime succeeding and sometimes failing) to make playing each ship fun. Very Good Players can make any ship, with any Matchmaking do good. They carry teams and that is why their win rating is so high. Average Joes like me, do our best, have fun and occasionally (last night) get shown for being just average. Last night while trying to turn around in my Hindy and withdraw, a BB hit me with Broadside and took me from almost full health to dead. It happens, and he was alert enough to see me in my turn, from half way across the map, and aimed it right and I was dead! That is what Good Player do.

There were a couple of submarines sunk by submarine launched torpedoes in WW2. There was only one submurged submarine sunk by another submarine though.

@scottgiles7546

11 ай бұрын

Are you counting the ones that sunk themselves when the torp circled back?

@jameshuggins17

11 ай бұрын

@@scottgiles7546 nope

I'm sure the captain of the Housatonic thought the same thing. "This is utter bullshit!"😂😂

Regarding submarine vs submarine fighting during WWII, there are more than one sub vs sub kill with torpedoes (though not underwater), but there was also a submarine vs submarine kill by ramming! On November 5 1942 the Finnish submarine Vetehinen was on a night patrol in the Baltic Sea searching for enemy submarines, and spotted the Soviet submarine ShCh-305, which had come up to the surface to recharge their batteries. Vetehinen launched a torpedo against the near stationary surface target but missed. Then Vetehinen opened fire with their deck gun, a 76mm Bofors, and tried a second torpedo. The second torpedo also missed, but they did score a hit or two with their guns forcing the Soviets to attempt a crash dive and retreat. The captain of the Vetehinen wasn't having any of that and ordered his sub to ram the Soviet sub. The teeth on the bow of Vetehinen ripped open the Soviet sub's hull and caused it to sink, while Vetehinen only suffered a minor leak and returned to port successfully. The Finnish Vetehinen-class submarines are a fascinating story in and of themselves. They were designed by a "Dutch" shell company in the 1920's, which was actually the Germans circumventing the Treaty of Versailles already in the 1920's, and the Vetehinen class design eventually served as a prototype for the German Type VII submarines. Three of them were completed, Vetehinen, Vesihiisi and Iku-Turso, named after creatures of Finnish folklore. Of the three, Vetehinen had that one ram kill on a Soviet submarine but managed little else during the war. Iku-Turso definitely hit a Soviet submarine with a torpedo and possibly sunk it on 27 October 1942. The crew if Iku-Turso reported a large oil spill with even more oil still rising up to the surface on the site of where they hit the Soviet sub. It's to this day debated which submarine they hit, itmight have been ShCh-320, which the Soviets did lose sometime then (although Russians claim they lost it to a mine), or possibly ShCh-308. There's not yet been a 100 % confirmation on that, I believe. Vesihiisi on the other hand DEFINITELY DID sink a Soviet submarine with a torpedo. On August 9th 1942 (the Finnish submarines really were on fire in 1942, which is nice because they basically managed fuck all for the rest of the war) Vesihiisi spotted, torpedoed and sank a Soviet S-class submarine S-7. They even caught survivors, the captain of the submarine, Sergei Lishin, and three other crew members who had been on the tower of the submarine when it sank.

"This is not reality, this is World of Warships". Thank you for one of your most educational episodes. The only thing accurate about most game play in this game, are the names of the ships (the ones that were actually real).

I can now understand why Jingles considers submarines to be “bullshit”, 33 knots on the surface and over 25 knots submerged, when did W.W.II submarines become nuclear powered?

@libraeotequever3pointoh95

11 ай бұрын

Repair party. Depth charges only hurt submarines. Radar and hydro function through islands. And etc. & etc. Realism left this arcade game a long time ago.

@MyFunnyVids888

5 ай бұрын

Yeah i dont understand why people wanna complain so much about subs breaking their irl stats when every ship in the game does​@@libraeotequever3pointoh95

Wargaming, the “We have historical accuracy at home” of the gaming world.

Fine Jingles, you got me, I'll play Cold Waters again

Actually Jingles, submarines did sank on another but apart from one case the target sub was not submerged. The only thing in WoWS that is vaguely correct is the ship graphic!

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

Click of guns cocking! 😂 Jingles sighs and says, "So, how you wanna do this?" 🤣

Only reason I watch sub games is so I can counter them better.

I just wish that a sub on the surface was less tanky than a destroyer.

It's not only SS that break the laws of physics, all ship classes do so. And if you measure the speed of the ships properly, ships are blazing around at what would be in excess of 90 knots.

Sonar Speed: You have to double the ingame sonar speed. Because it is not enough to hit a target with your active sonar, you have to listen for the reflected sound that has to travel back from the target to your sensors.

Re subs during WWII, in the Pacific theatre USN subs sank 18 Japanese subs (I-boats and RO-boats). _USS Batfish_ is credited with sinking two. Japan sank one US sub, _USS Corvina_ by _I-176_ . What was exceeding rare was a submerged sub sinking a submerged enemy sub.

@Veloxyll

11 ай бұрын

So exceedingly rare other commentators have only named a solitary instance.

I may not play them or like them, but I have no issue if Jingles does a Submarine reply every now and then. Or an Aircraft Carrier replay for that matter. I recall one such Aircraft Carrier replay I loved watching, because it was 5% replay and 95% Jingles taking about real life historical aircraft carrier damage control in WW2. Jingles being Jingles, we might get some interesting historical stuff about Submarines if he features them more often.

He sold us out! 🤣 It's always fun to watch your videos Jingles, don't worry.

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

Annual sub video? Like War Thunder. 😂

It weould be nice if WG could introduce a tick box option that would allow you to select types of ship that you didn't want to see in battle, and only put you in battles that didn't include those ships. Might increase waiting times a touch (like forever, for CVs - perhaps they would get the hint) but I would be happy to wait a bit longer to get in to a non bullcrap battle.

@scottgiles7546

11 ай бұрын

So WG isn't "Weight Gain" then....

@StarkRaven59

11 ай бұрын

If you want that sort of game mode, it would have to come with a serious drawback like abysmal XP and credit earning. You'd basically fracture the player base into their own little cliques while destabilizing the random queue.

There is only one instance in which one submarine sank another submarine while both were submerged… and it most definitely was NOT accidental. HMS Venturer sank the U-864 having actually been specifically ordered by the Admiralty to do so. The U-864 was running its diesel underwater by way of snorkel, resulting in a sound signature that the hydrophone operator aboard the Venturer could not identify. Upon spotting the snorkel, assuming it was a periscope, they stalked it waiting for it to surface so they could engage it with torpedoes. Running out of time before they themselves had to surface to run their own diesel to charge the batteries. The captain had to estimate speed, distance, bearing and depth based on a periscope sighting of the snorkel, and whatever information could be gleaned from the hydrophones. A spread of 4 torpedoes with a 17 second space between launches was evidently detected by the German Uniate that immediately engaged in evasive maneuvers, but ended up being hit by one of the torpedoes. They found the wreckage in 2003 and the cargo of mercury is posing a significant ecological risk.

I know I'm not the only one, but gimmicks like subs in the game are what slowly choked the enjoyment I had in playing. At least there's Jingles to keep us entertained with wonderfully commentated replay videos.

the problem with submarines is much like aircraft carriers but more so, of trying to fit a strategic weapon into a tactical game

Sir I need to point out this, a U.S. Sub sank 3 IJN boats in one patrol and made it look like it was just a matter of ' Business as usual ' and the UK sank a U-boat while both were submerged, both are very informative, enjoy the read.

@EvoraGT430

11 ай бұрын

IJN famously bad at hunting subs.

The issue with Carriers is the counter play, or lack thereof. Carrier risks very little in attacking you while a sub takes on significant risk. A sub can be depth charged while attacking. Good luck finding and catching up to the carrier

@thecivilizedshark4283

11 ай бұрын

Good luck dodging these homing torps if I’m not detected

@Revkor

8 ай бұрын

and all that can be done is buff the FUCKING AA

Thank you Jingles for reminding me as to why I do not play World of Warships

My dad was a reactor officer on the USS Barb (SSN-596) he said there were two types of vessels in a navy. Submarines and targets

Hi Jingles, don't worry, I have this one covered.....Explanation: basically the player was doing a scuba-doober, and a ping-pong to do the good-torp, to do the boom-boom.

Always a good morning with jingles

Physics teacher here: "The speed of sound is 343 m/s." Starts typing the um actually comment, then JINGLES GETS THE FYZIX RIGHT! Sat back down and applauded.

Two things I believe he was doing incorrectly- first he was sending out homing torps in a single conga line- it's better to send them in a wide fan. Second, he's pinging too early- that spooks the BB potato and usually leads them to go hide behind an island or permakite for the rest of the game. You want to ping them when the torps are around 10 km away. The aforementioned "fan" then converges on the target from multiple directions, making dodging impossible and giving very little warning.

I was hoping the thumbnail for the video was just clickbait instead its watching 'a square peg being rammed into a round hole.' I'm assuming next WOWs video will be a Malta dumpstering on light cruisers/s 14:40 Actually, torps, especially from British Subs can out turn most DD's, Flamu did testing with it. And using DCP is a little hard when you have a CV, Hybrid Battleship, Hybrid Cruiser or Hybrid DD targeting you. Also that XP at the end, that would be the baked in base XP boost subs get.

An interesting view below the surface. Some bizarre game mechanics though. Still, fun to watch. Keep on Jingling , Jingleman. We'll keep the salt flowing. Affection to the ladies of the Caer. 🐈🐈‍⬛👑✌️🖖

I saw this on the Top Tier channel. Spaeaking of which, they had a Shimakaze replay, and just as Jingles said, it was more interesting to watch the scenery and read the comments in chat.

I lost it with Submarines when attempting to sink with a Destroyer. I was using Air to Air tactics, Jamming the WEZ and holding a almost crank pattern. The moment my engine boost quit working I was no longer able to gain unless pointed head on, and even with that, the difference was so negligible he/she had all the time to reload and finish me. That was right after Subs released, haven’t played WoWs PvP since. Ops and co-op for me now, or just don’t play at all.

Headphone user here, you can hear Jingles' guts rearranging themselves at 12:55 right after he says, "They're really not" Have fun!

One could argue - if one wanted - that the 'sonar ping' mechanic didn't represent a single actual sound-return cycle of sonar, but the process of using sonar to accurately determine target heading, with the ability to aim it representing the competency of the vessel's crew. Thus, better sonar equipment and training would make the process both quicker and more reliable, being represented in game by faster movement speed of the 'ping'. TL, DR: the ping isn't a sonar ping, it's a firing solution.

11:20 Actually Jingles, if the density of a medium goes up, the speed of sound drops. Sound in water is so much faster because in water a very slight compression causes a large change in pressure and therefore larger forces to equalize. Basically, the particles are bound much more rigidly together.

WoW sub may be bs, but the Das Boot battle music from the soundtrack that I played while watching this compliments your commentary perfectly. Thank you for the fun as always Jingles!

6:00 "That's all the health that he's going to have to use for the rest of this battle" Isn't this Arms Race, with the healing? By the end, he's restored almost 3k health...

You know the gnome lord is pissed when he breaks out the physics textbook to gripe.

As someone who mains battleships and cruisers, I'll admit to being part of the club of hating on subs and carriers. That being said I still give the subs just a little credit. Subs still have to leave spawn and head into the battle to accomplish anything. Carriers can just hide in the back and launch strikes with impunity. While yes that is kind of the point of carriers, at least prior to the rework they had a limited amount of planes and if they weren't careful, could run out of planes well before the end of the match.

as a sub player i am loving this video! subs in general are played terribly, patience and planning attacks is key to playing subs.

@michaelmasters1212

11 ай бұрын

was it also the shit eating attitude in comms? I see that all too much, including this video

I agree with you Jingles. I am a retired submariner and I do not play subs (or at least not that often) because of the garbage that Warships have done to make them viable.

I've said it before, subs now are like pre-rework CVs. The captains that know what they are doing will wipe the floor with you while most captains can barely find their ass with both hands. Which gives the appearance that subs aren't very strong. Just like the pre-rework cvs, most captains weren't very good and would get deplaned by halfway thru the battle and were useless, but the good captains would be cross dropping torps on one ship while simultaneously divebombing another ship and sending fighters to intercept planes from the enemy carrier.

i use to play a game called navy field way back in the day. It was pretty fun and very similar to warships. They added subs to the game, and it just destroyed everything.

@lindaorr1805

5 ай бұрын

Ah I played many of hours in navy field. As smokingrillman or some variation of it. It was a great game at the time then moved on to EVEONLINE. Ah those were the days

U.S. used the mark 42 “mine” which was an acoustically guided,air dropped torpedo. (It was designated as a “mine” to avoid the U.S. Navy’s ‘torpedo experts” having/getting their “inputs” into the development of the weapon. Sub Vs sub sinkings (surface torpedoing) definitely did occur. Check out the U.S.S. Baitfish’s record.

You know what grinds my gears? It's the destroyers. Subs are just undersea destroyers, aircraft carriers can be hunted down.

Never thought I'd see the day I see Jingles feature a submarine vid.

Subs are completely OP, Jingles. Undetectable by hydro ASW weapons barely work against them, especially in Tier 8 and 10 Have the ability to nuke any ship Are way faster than they should both on the surface and underwater And the list goes on

@libraeotequever3pointoh95

11 ай бұрын

Reading the wiki about game mechanics might be helpful.

@Powerhaus88

11 ай бұрын

@@libraeotequever3pointoh95 JuSt DoDgE bRo. Thank you, I will add your comment to my animal research.

_This replay was sponsored by...The Shadow Government_

Jingles, You would enjoy the story of HMS Venturer sinking U864 and the brilliant work of Captain James Launders (I think he was a LT at the time). WW2's only reported underwater engagement and sinking of a U boat by a British Sub.

@leodesalis5915

11 ай бұрын

It's even crazier when you find out he did all the calculations by hand without a computer fired 3 torps along it's predicted path and a 4th on a path to hit if the sub were to dive, which it did and the torp hit and sunk her with all hands.

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

I think he did all the calculations on paper, right? The last torpedo fired was angled to catch the other sub in case it dived! It did! 😂

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

​@@leodesalis5915Didn't see your comment before typing mine! 😎👍

@leodesalis5915

11 ай бұрын

@@paulvamos7319 no worries man I've done it myself a couple times 😂

@paulvamos7319

11 ай бұрын

@@leodesalis5915 👍😎

Just to add to the BS about submarines in WOWS, even though unlimited ammo is part of the game, in submarines it becomes glaring. He had 23 torpedo hits in this game, not counting all the misses. The Gato class sub of WW2 only carried a total of 24. Torpedoes are very large munitions inside a very small vessel. Picture a 21 inch Battleship shell complete with the powder charge to shoot it in a long metal tube. And if you've ever been inside a WW2 sub on a tour, you know how extremely cramped things are inside and that space is at a premium.

My problem with submarines is 4 things in order of importance. Though if you adressed the top 3 i think the last one would be mostly fine. This makes them incredibly stealthy destroyers with far less counter play options availible. 1. How detection works. A sub can pop up and nuke you from 2km away and you have no hope of detecting it or countering it. They should have a minimum detection distance of atleast 5-7 km on the surface and at periscope and 2 or 3km when deep. 2. Submarine speed combined with the bullshit detection. Because they are so fast and so stealthy it can make it really hard to predict when and where they will show up. 25kts should be the fastest on the surface of any ship and 18kts submerged. A standard class battleship should be able to run away from it. Give them a speed boost ability on the surface only if it presents some gameplay issues. 3. Ping frequency. You addressed it in the video. I already feel like damage control cool down is way to long to begin with, considering it has to deal with fire, flooding, and broken components. Either shorten damage control cool downs by atleast 40% or better yet give everyone a seperate anti ping consumable. Or just get rid of homing torpedos entirely and give a spread like every other ship. 4. Offensive counterplay. On the surface the ships that have shorter offensive ranges have less detectibility and mechanisms like smoke that allow counter play. The situation with submarines is reversed. The ship with lower detectibilty (the sub) has longer offensive range. (This also happens to be at the heart of what is wrong with carriers). And in the case of DDs dramatically so. So you can not do one of the legs of the triangle of counterplay in this game. (Offensive fire power, detectibility, or armor use) Submarines effectively have a near unlimited on demand smoke cool down via going deep. And this "smoke" is immune to radar and far more resistant to sonar then surface ships. This is like giving the battleship better stealth then all cruisers, and destroyers and giving them british smokes that are also long duration. And making battleships as fast or almost as fast as the ships above so running away wasnt an option.

Aw jingless.... subs really... you'll be doing cvs next... No fairey Swordfish on Warspite by the way... Walrus. Warspite was actually very lucky to get out of the Fijords with all the torpedo armed ships in there, but well... Warspite. Also don't understand how he got a Solo Warrior - that's last on the team against FOUR enemies and survive, he was only against one.

With both CVs and subs the disgusts stems from how coddled both classes are. With CVs it has become even more apparent since the introduction of the hybrids. Remember CV players can only directly control their planes because expecting them to control, their planes, DC, ASW, and steer the ship would be too much but hybrids it's reasonable to expect the player to control the ship, it's guns, ASW, strike craft, DC, and Repair.

In my experience, it's not even the homing torps that make subs frustrating to play against: if the sub gives themselves away too early trying to get two pings, they're laughably easy to dodge, even without damage control. It's the fact that submarines get access to information-related tools that no other ship type in the game does. Hydrophone is basically radar but better, since it doesn't tell the enemy they've been pinged by it and still updates their position on the minimap for your allies to see. The Watchful skill also tells the submarine when they're in range of a surveillance consumable (radar, hydroacoustic search, sub surveillance) even if they don't get detected by it. Imagine if there was a captain skill that told you when you were approaching an active radar consumable. Every ship, and I mean EVERY ship, would take it.

have to love that subs are as fast and surface ships

During WWII the standard American submarine launched torpedo was the mark 14. Which by the way was hated by every sailor and only stayed in service for as long as it did because of politicians.

Well actually Jingles, the speed of sound is indeed constant. Speed of sound is constant throughout the same medium. Inconsistency comes from the medium the sound is traveling through.

To be pedantic: Yes...underwater sub vs sub duels didn't really happen...but, a quick look at the list of confirmed Japanese subs sunk include five by US subs (all IJN subs were on the surface). The Scamp, Seadragon, Triton, Tautog, and Gudgeon all were credited with sinking an IJN sub. It looks like 24 U-Boats were confirmed killed by Allied submarines during the war, as well. 🙃

if you look at the score page at the end of the battle you will see the subs are either top 3 or bottom 3 in most every battle. there aren't many so-so players, they are either really good with them, or they suck completely. everything about sub play is broken. most DDs can't chase them down, the good sub players can sit just outside of detect range and spam torps until you die or go cower on the backline, the homing torps don't disengage as advertised from DDs/CAs, if subs dive deep even hydro won't detect them, we all have seen them drive under ships with hydro going and never get spotted. if enough player were to put the time into learning to play subs, that would be the only thing in the que.

For comparison, known 21st century submarine launched torpedoes only go around 45-50 knots. 21st century Diesel electric boats can manage a brisk ~20 knots submerged, while nuclear boats can do mid- to high- 30s. Only some of the Titanium soviet boats could break 40.

Lots of submarines were sunk by other submarines during WWII, just on the surface, typically ambushed. In particular, the USN was rather effective at using them them to ambush German U-Boats carrying stuff to Japan, and I believe it was the USS Batfish, which sank 4 Japanese submarines. If memory serves, the Japanese were using those subs to supply garrisons.

Wait til jingles finds out that aircraft carriers are even more OP in real life.

"Carriers are easy to do well in" - said by someone that clearly has minimal relevant experience in the class. In my experience both playing as and against subs are CVs in WoWs, subs are the most bullshit. Primarily because of the sonar ping cooldown being as quick as it is, like you mentioned.

WG took a sledgehammer to a submarine shaped peg into a round hole and beat that peg into place.

when it comes to submarines breaking rules of physics. regardless of their absurd speeds lets not forget that subs cant go fast when they have periscopes or other devices extended even modern subs. if the subs do they risk breaking them.

@malkymac7258

11 ай бұрын

Yep. If you tried to run much faster than about 6 knots with your scope up you wouldn't be see anything, as the scope would be vibrating too much, as well as leaving a more noticeable wake.

Also remember that subs also outspot every single destroyer in the game, which effectively means you can never play something like a Yugumo or a Shimakaze to spot enemy targets if there's an enemy sub.

@Adplosive

10 ай бұрын

Not true, the vast majority of subs get outspotted by shimakaze, notable exceptions being U-2501 & Undine. Balao, Thrasher and Gato all get outspotted

@testaccountpleaseignore2653

10 ай бұрын

Submarines at periscope depth are only spotted at 2.1km away from a target, which means they have all the distance in the world to spot anything without risking themselves

ah yes, physics lololol Radars penetrating mountains and slow pings

@EvoraGT430

11 ай бұрын

30-knot subs firing 90-knot homing torps at 4 times its historical range.

A frigging Los Angeles nuclear-powered submarine doesn't go as fast as these supposedly WW2-vintage diesel-electric subs in WoWs. Wargaming have lost their minds, there's no other explanation.

This video is sponsored by; *The Shadow Government*

As a veteran sub-simmer (Aces of the Deep, All the modded Silent Hunters), I found this video horrifying.

This is honestly pretty minuscule but hydroacoustic search, the tech that was designed specifically to spot and locate submarines doesn’t actually do that in world of warships, you can use it to spot surface ships through islands though, but not submarines, yeah makes sense

On 9 February 1945, she became the only submarine in history to be sunk by an enemy submarine while both were submerged. U-864 was sunk by the British submarine HMS Venturer, and all 73 men on board died ! it says it all ...

Thx for the lesson "old man" 😉

Jingles: "Submarines don't have heals." Me: Yet.

Jingles is being Jingles! Let's just smile and move on swiftly! 😂 ❤ That little mistake does not diminishing the informative value of this video what we just got!

One thing that does bother me about the subs is its like the homing torpedoes and the non-homing torpedoes on the higher end ships should have their speeds switched. The way its currently setup, the most effective way to use the non-homing torpedoes is to shotgun, which just feels dirty ah. It almost to me seems like it'd be more balanced if the homing torpedoes were the slower torpedoes, while the non-homing ones were the faster ones. It'd encourage more use of the non-homing torpedoes at longer ranges due to their increased speed, and would also encourage their use by proxy due to the lack of speed on the homing torpedoes discouraging their use.

BTW JIngles, the Russian subs of which there is a entire sub line in testing, get to have a 980m/s ping velocity. There is one russian sub that is in live rn, that would be the S-189.

I am fairly certain the WW2 USN 'developed' a torpedo capable of being sub-launched and used against submarines with homing capability (they literally took the Mk24 mine; a 480mm homing torpedo designed for air dropped ASW and bolted some wood to it so it fit inside a 533mm sub torpedo tube); but none were ever fired in anger against enemy submarine assets. So *in theory* WG's magic mystical sub torpedoes are... extremely loosely based on something from WW2 reality. Obviously the only SS to SS kill was HMS Venturer against a U-boat; the majority of actual usage of the Mk24 mine were from the air where it was moderately successful.

Jingles fyi the homing torpedo on the u-boats came very late in the war and were not a very good or widely available weapon for WG to have come up with this strange and unrealistic submarine gameplay. Also they were all passive homing torpedoes, not actively guided. Pinging a warship meant a death wish as it would reveal its presence. Torpedoes back then turned out to be "dud" often. When set to detonate on impact a torpedo required to have proper angle of collision, at 90 degrees ideally or flat enough. It is why the magnetic detonation system was also provided. The old gas powered German torps were easier to spot. When adjusted for fast speed it did not travel far and in order for it to travel a long distance it had to be fixed so it traveled at a slow speed. Also the test depths varied greatly between submarines of various nations. Some were not guaranteed to hold together deeper than 90 feet while some were tested by the shipyards to reach depths as much as 220 meters with no danger to the vessels' hull integrity from the pressure. At periscope depths the snorkel was used to make the submarine run on diesel and not on its battery. The snorkel provided the diesel engines with air. In wows its all anything but submarine or asw.

BTW JIngles, the Russian subs of which there is a entire sub line in testing, get to have a 980m/s ping velocity. There is one Russian sub that is in live rn, that would be the S-189.

cream? cream? Jingles? the cream, please? Jingles? You have some cream for Princess Akizuki?