So when people say "Overpowered for their level" balance=nerf. You can fluff it all you want, but that is what the lemmings are crying for.

Oh, and so long as we are balancing a "level based game" will this include BB3 vs. SS4 on a 1v1 in the test server? I haven't shown up to the test server for lack of interest, but I would love to show up for this alone.

From the looks of SS5 - They seem to be worse than SS4, so yes I will still play a BB in GB/2 with 2 SS5's.

Because then sub drivers do not need to fire at range, giving ships a chance to dodge. They can come right up to minimum torp arm distance and lay into the side of their target. At that point, without ASW ships ahead of the BB line (which does not work because ASW get sunk that way) then their really is nothing BBs can do to avoid getting sunk.
Splash damage was intended to compensate for the dud rate in torps, as well as add in some random chance mechanic to mirror gun shell spread on BBs.

I said I doubt they can do it given the game engine's limitations. Maye they can, but I'm not betting on it.

Subs already do have a giveaway for their location: when they fire off torps, it highlights where they are pretty well.

Having played both every sub line from SS1 to SS4 in all 6 nations (except SN, only at SS3 there thanks to the XP nerf) with NO POWER LEVELING, and the KM BB line to H39, the IJN line up to Yammy, as well as starting BB lines in every nation, I have to disagree.
You have a LOT more options in CA and BB play to get some XP, from sniping to slingshot, to smoking, or just shadowing another BB and helping clean up, plus AA for at least some XP depending on your line and the gunners you have.
A sub on the other hand has just one option: stealth. Nothing else. Using a lot of the skills and tactics I've learned means that I've got a 1 in 4 chance of scoring attack in SS1 and SS2's. Someone just starting has little chance of any attack until they learn what works, which is why most people advise skipping SS1 and SS2 altogether, and start learning at SS3.

And that is why it's also considered to increase the arming distance of sub torpedos.
Personally I'd also like to see a range increase and possible damage increase (along with more torpedos) once splash and duds are removed. Ideally, subs could choose to attack from longer ranges and risk missing more torpedos, or get closer and increase the chance of hitting, but also risk getting caught by ASW.

Splash damage wasn't meant to compensate for the dud rate. The dud rate was supposed to compensate for the stupidly high torp damage the subs have. Several years ago, NFNA got a huge torp nerf because of an abundance of TWs ruining the game. Subs did not get the same nerf when they were introduced to NFNA.

Splash damage is a by product of that.

Even at minimum arm distance, people can turn towards or away from torps and dodge them. And, you have to remember that the idea of removing duds and lowering splash goes in combination with a bunch of other balance ideas including possible increasing reload, decreasing damage, and introducing an ability for BBs to have some sort of sonar.

If BBs had some sort of fractional inherent sonar that was right at the minimum arming distance for fast torps, then, conceivably, they would spot the sub right as or right before he fired his torps, in your scenario. I don't know how many players that would get to minimum arming distance and fire because one turns towards and all their torps are gone.

If BBs had some other ability to spot subs, then they could try and dodge one or two of the torps, then bring their scout to drop a buoy. Or, if subs had to come to periscope depth and fire before retreating deeper, then the BB would get a second or two of notice that they were about to get destroyed.



Hey, cool. Another "I have a bunch of ships" argument. You've started BB line in every nation? That's crazy. I couldn't imagine doing that. That must've taken...like...years to do.

Like, every single nation?

How are you able to play BB for every single nation? Isn't it confusing or hard? Man, wouldn't it be awesome to have the BB6 for every nation? That's going to be quite an accomplishment when you level all those BB lines.

Even though you have BB lines in every nation, I'm still going to point out that you are slightly missing my point.

Yes, subs only have stealth to get attack. However, that doesn't mean they need to rush straight at the biggest BBs on the enemy team to get attack. SS12 can play the support role quite well. Instead of thinking they need to be attack ships, they could play the support role that other ships of similar level, killing rushing ships or going out to meet enemy subs.

Given how a GB2 plays, they could hang around the BB line...possibly even venturing out to no man's land before coming back. Rinse and repeat a few times and they could probably find a time to pick off a ship or meet a sub. If that doesn't look to be working, they could end up trying to pull a hero rush off.

It isn't required that level 40/50 ships rush straight at the BB line to get attack.

No, when people say "overpowered for their level" balance is not equal to nerf. It means just that a ship at a determined level should perform like another ship of the same level.

Right now, SS1=38 while BB1/Cv1 is around 50. Does that mean we have to make sure SS1 perform like a CL?... absolutely not. There is always the option of rising the required level and then make it perform like a BB1.

About BB3 vs SS4, you just pointed out what I said. Why compare BB3 to SS4?... SS4 is a Tier 4 ship. As to the 1vs1... I'm not sure. They are 2 different type of ships and have different play-styles... SS should win while it's underwater, but once its out BB wins.

I will say it again and as many times as is needed for everyone to understand. Balance is not a nerf... it is a combination of buffs and nerfs, and there are a lot of variables to play with in order to achieve balance... you have to give and take in order to balance something, specially when new content comes prepared for an uncapped server and it has to fit in NFNA where we have caps.

SS4 vs BB3 because they are the ~same level. If we are to compare ship vs. ship in a level based game, then this is needed to achieve balance.


If people believe a ship is overpowered for its level, and they want to balance it in order to reduce its overall effectiveness, then by all rights and measures, it gets nerfed.

This post just proves everything for me. BB's can't use sonar. ASW can.

RPS works fine when things are the same level. There isn't any high level ASW, and there isn't any high level submarines yet.

Furthermore, dragging out GB's/HA's due to more airtime? Won't make a difference in GB2's, counter attack time. In HA's, its simple; Tiles are won if just an SS is left.

I completely agree with the first list of proposals. about the second one though. as LJ has stated, the RPS only works when they are same level. and since im pro of RPS, i like the idea of different HH depending on level and as such the inclusion of high level ASW ships. thaht way BBs detecting SSs would be unnecesary. i really dont think BBs should be able to see an SS, thats their sole purpose. but having high level support ships with high level HH and the such, would make a good defense for BBs.

if the concern about BBs not seeing an SS 50 levels below and getting sunk is the problem, i think my idea of "ship level based torp reduction factor" suits better and let the SSs keep their stealth. if you want to know more about the torp reduction factor i propose go to the test forums discussion. i posted the link a few pages back.