"As long as I can dodge a full spread of torps, and still get heavily damaged/sunk, subs
will not be properly balanced against other ships. Period. "

QFT... This is why subs take no skill. No need to even hit a ship once to sink it.

SylverXI, you are obviously nub if you can't kill BB's easily in a sub.

I laugh at non PHH in my subs. If you talk about PHH, then yes, they are stupidly
overpowered for their level, as are subs.

Add a number of HH launchers at different levels, with varying power. Allow all ships to
run a sonarman, but don't give any ship "natural" (non sonarman aboard) sonar.

Make SS gameplay far more difficult and interesting. Currently its just point click, fire, kill
(even if you completely miss the target).

Give all nations the ability for less damage torps but have the proxy function.

Give subs more ammo, but less damage.

Nerf Subs reload.

Rebalance the levels of subs. SS4's should be at BB4 level. SS3's should be at BB3 level.
SS2's at BB2 etc etc. Put a new ASW CL or CA between SS1 and where it comes off the
normal tree.

Allow SLOW movement in crit dive.

Just look at my post earlier in the thread. Go read it. As with Brazens.

There are so many idea's that can improve subs for everyone. Its not about having your
auto "I Win ship".

If you currently think it is fair for a level 77 ship to one shot a level 120 ship, then you
should have no say on game balance as you have no idea what you are on about.

But then again, I didn't expect anything else from SylverXI and SK_Bismarck.

A BB3 has so much more capability do more throughout the course of a battle than a sub
can. BB3's can scout (except nelson), AA, OH longer, go faster, repair faster, much more
range, MUCH better firing arcs and practically impervious to FF/DD/CL. Subs are a 1 trick
pony with an easy counter.

Wishful thinking, but I'd like to have the ability to toggle off/on my escort while
waiting in the battleroom.

You may not see it...

I just said I have been doing it, so far I calculate I sunk around 50 SS. Gues many times
I was sunk by SS, 0 times LOL. So yeah, CL with hight level crew beat SS everytime.

"At the same time, if you put a CV with sonar and HH up against a SS of the same of
higher tier, the SS is useless.

If you put a CL with high level crew against a SS4, the SS4 is useless."

That's an extreme generalization that I have not seen in game.

So CV6 have to buffed to make them better against a BB3 at the BB3 max range? NO
that's just the thing, you can't compare or argue that a BB have to be able to take on a
SS.

SS are BB killers thus be able to take 1 down if he gets the BB in his range. At the same
time, if you put a CV with sonar and HH up against a SS of the same of higher tier, the
SS is useless.

If you put a CL with high level crew against a SS4, the SS4 is useless.

"The question we should ask ourselves is...should this game be balanced nationwise
or Classwise. Should one nation have better SS, but worse BB and good CV. Should
we have nations with worse SS, best CV and BB?(reasons why some say US FP are
balanced or KM/IJN SS is balanced)

Or do we want all nations to be balanced per class. All BB's all CV's and all SS's are
equally competent in their own unique way."

------
I'm not sure what this is saying. (I mean, ignoring the rest of your post which is
"lukas is wrong, subs are fine" since that isn't really an argument)

There are multiple things that go in to balance. You seem to be creating a false
dichotomy as though there are only two choices.

Nations are balanced between each other producing nations that are better at
something over a comparable ship of a different nation. That allows for variance and
choice when playing the game.

However, within each tier, the ships are balanced by class so that ships of
comparable classes are not extremely out of whack. It would be stupid to make one
nation's BB4 infinitely better than all the other BB4s. They all should be equally
balanced so that, even though they are different, they are not ridiculously horrible
overall.

Obviously, there are points where one BB is better than others. The argument
shouldn't be so bad that people are in agreement on what is obviously better.

For example, the Lion 2 is a great BB5. Lots of people think it is a great BB5.
However, there are more than enough people that can argue that SY is comparable
or better in many aspects. And, there are people that love the Montana or Alsace
more. In the same vein, the UK BBs are good. Lots of people like them. However,
there are people that love the KM or USN BBs.

And, you have glossed over the level balance aspect. Ships are also balanced level
wise. A level 77 BB3 is at a huge disadvantage against a level 120 BB6. It would be
silly to think that they should be balanced and that the BB3 should have a remote
shot at sinking the BB6 (scouting/air cover or bad play don't allow for balance
changes).

**To add, it seems a whole host of people that feel subs are fine completely ignore
the idea of level-based balance. Something that NF has always depended on. Yes,
those elitist 120 BB players are arrogant because they have 120 ships. That's the
point of the game, to be highest level because it has the best stuff.

If people would like to take the current SS4 and jack them up to level 103 and leave
them alone, I'd probably be ok with that.

However, when looking at other level 75~ ships, they are incredibly overpowered**

=============

Again, I reaffirm my statement from before, I would love to have a BB3 that can turn
invisible to BBs for 3+ minutes, can one shot any ship in the game without even
landing a shell, and can only be sunk by direct hits from HHs. For this, I will gladly go
33 knots.

ljsevern is nub when it come to SS. SS are well balanced for what we have. Hasn't
anyone notice the sloppy work on the SS. There just isn't enough features in the
game to balance SS properly. Instead we have overpowered ASW with overpowered
SS. Which balance things out for the time being.

I really don't have much problems with SS in this game. Maybe 1 every 10 battle...

LOL at KM and IJN are overpowered against the other nations. Did you try playing
the MN,UK SS? US and SN are underpowered. But makes up for US having the best
Fighters and best all around BB6. If SS5 and SS6 are introduced, it might get even
better balanced for US and SN.

A CV with sonar can take on 2 SS of the same tier if he's good at it. A BB with HH can
take on a SS if he is good at aswell. What we need is SS5 and SS6 with better
balanced ASW and only then nerf the SS3 and SS4.

The question we should ask ourselves is...should this game be balanced nationwise
or Classwise. Should one nation have better SS, but worse BB and good CV. Should
we have nations with worse SS, best CV and BB?(reasons why some say US FP are
balanced or KM/IJN SS is balanced)

Or do we want all nations to be balanced per class. All BB's all CV's and all SS's are
equally competent in their own unique way.

It's a matter of perspective. ljsevern obviusly seems to root for the 2nd choice.

PS. I have been playing ASW for a couple of days, so far not a single SS has been
able to kill me LOL, all SS where killed before even touching my BB's. Yeah, SS are
overpowered alright hahaha(jajaja).

Quite honestly, i've elaborated on Sub balance so many times. Go search for it.

I really should have a post that I can copypasta.

As long as I can dodge a full spread of torps, and still get heavily damaged/sunk, subs
will not be properly balanced against other ships. Period.