World of Warships- Hate Subs? You’re Gonna LOVE This!

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (575 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Hey guys! Today we have some great news for submarine haters! A huge number of ships are getting damage buffs to depth charges and a buffed number of depth charges as well!


Have a replay?

Join the Discord here!:

Apply for TSIOF here!:


  1. WG ” We introduced subs, you hated it, we ignored you, you left and stopped playing”

    • Numbers must not be looking so good on the Ol’ spreadsheet. Honestly WOW was great because you got to shoot big guns at ships, yet WG keeps making it so there would be less surface ships to shoot at. Classic case of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    • Everytime I see 2 subs per team, I just play stupid in my BB and stay way back.

    • I quit this game. And started to play Helldivers…and discovered that I actually enjoy gaming 😀

    • You quit over subs? Hahaha. That was what the final draw was? Just shows how “smart” the players that are left are….

    • Yup. That’s why I stopped. The last two matches I played a few months ago resulted in me dying from shotgunning subs with the first 5 min. Haven’t been back since and this update won’t bring me back either.

  2. Looks like plan is stay back & hope DD charges into guns of surface mates.

  3. @timothyodenwald7441

    Can only hope that – in future updates – BBs will see their ASW damage increased as well. DIRECT HITs ought to be able to take at least 1/3 of the sub’s HP

    • Maybe we also let subs take away 1/3 of a battleships HP with a single hit too? From 10km away and through an island to boot?

    • @timothyodenwald7441

      @@Uni790 We both know that (shot-gunning) subs can CURRENTLY easily remove 1/3 of a BB HP with a single salvo

    • Before ASW damage is increased, its range needs to be increased by factor of 1.3-1.5. Lower tiers are a total shitshow because sub range does not scale properly per tier.

    • @timothyodenwald7441

      @@Obst Perhaps. Just yesterday (in Ranked), 2 Direct Hits on a Sub that removed less than 40% of his health. Using the same logic…I’m expected to land 5 Direct Hits to sink the SOB? What good does more ASW range do if you’re not inflicting (signifcant) damage?

  4. Crazy how willing they are to change subs this hard and not touch the actual gamebreaking class for years (CV). Spotting changes are overdue

    • tbh, if anything spotting is the one thing I do not despise for carriers, it is an integral part of a CV gameplay. However the spotting range could be lowered a bit and a CV should not be able to deal out gigantic damage on top. In short, make CV deal their damage but not as it is now. I could also get behind the idea of having much different CV archetypes, IJN CVs could deal low dps but high upload dmg (think of kamikazee) while american CVs have low upload damage but high dps. Hitting for 15-25k per volley or 8 torps is simply unacceptable with the other perks a CV brings.

    • @@l.a.w.5738 It’s ridiculous to be able to spot nearly the entire enemy team in the first minute of the game. That is valuable information knowing which ship is where. It eliminates a lot of strategy and takes away any element of surprise if you’re a DD or CA trying to set a trap. I think they need to implement a new type of spotting mechanic for CVs where only they can see surface ships at a certain distance and then if they want their team to also be able to see them they would have to lock on to the enemy ship for 5 seconds or something for them to be spotted for the rest of their team. This would sort of mimic spotting planes relaying information over the radio back to their fellow ships.

    • 100% agree. I do not understand this at all.

    • Just make spotting minimap only, but WG is too complex to do that@@garystew2077

    • @@garystew2077 They already have a mechanic in game called radio location. It shows ship location on mini map but is not actually visible. Thats what it should be and I’ve never understood why it isn’t. It solves a lot of issues and doesn’t reduce any of the ‘fun’ form the CV’s perspective.

  5. It would be nice, as a way to compensate for this and the anti-shotgunning changes a little, if all sub deck guns were made player controlled, so us players who find subs somewhat fun to play can at least a) actually damage an enemy sub inside of three kilometers and b) be able to shoot back against a DD in the same range, regardless of how little the latter will do. Maybe make it possible to incap DC launchers on DDs and CLs as well.

    On the other hand, its a good change, both from a balance and historical accuracy perspective.

    • @drakeconsumerofsoulsandche4303

      The ones that are AI are the 88mm guns which WG typically leaves as secondaries anyway. Only the larger 100mm+ guns are main batteries

    • You are not allowed to damage DDs unless the DD player allows you to – this is the current state of game design and player mentality.

  6. Idk why they didn’t buff RN CL line as well, considering that they only have AP which means you must be very accurate at hitting them at ranges unlike HE spammers. Also 4 ship depth charges in Minotaur is a joke compare to her nephew Brisbane that got ASW airstrikes.

  7. @deadmanschest4322

    It would be nice if Radio Location (at least for DD without Submarine Surveillance, in case some would get it some day) also worked on submerged submarines (minor hydroacoustic component). And yes, that would require taking nearly the same risk as any DD and CA with good stealth who goes far out to attack the enemy from the flank. If you risk it, you can be the hero of the day or you’ll soon be back in port, just like any DD or stealthy CA.

  8. @hapexamendar1093

    Remember… these are basically free attacks! Attack randomly too. I’ve hit and even sank a sub “randomly”!!

  9. @oneangrycanadian6205

    Play lower tier and you get 3 subs per side along with a carrier sealord

  10. I just wish the DD could detect subs easier. I’ve spent a lot of games chasing them down in my Fletcher

  11. One step in the Right direction..keep going WG
    Gonna take years,to fix the damage done to the game, since the very first time subs were involved

  12. Biggest DD ASW upgrade I want is the DDs with rocket depth charges, have an aiming reticle coming out front.

  13. @pickeljarsforhillary102

    If only Mister_MRE put as much effort into his grammar as he did in crying about the Gearing.

  14. @TheEurotrash1999

    DD’s are the only class that should have depth charges. Cruisers up should be with air strike ASW.

    • Very true what is really lacking is WGing out look on the game is the lack of realism(subs that fast underwater bull shit) try and make the game realistic not focused on what they are doing now and layers will return.

    • ⁠@@Jauger79german type 21 were vvery fast underwater

    • Light CA have been known to carry depth charges so their no need for ASW for those ships.

  15. I would like to see some major plane based ASW changes. The depth charges dropped should be double no one is sending out a plane to drop a single depth charge thats just silly. But id like to have is the option to choose active or passive ASW at the discretion of the commander in battle. So how this would work is this Active would mean you send a plane out to a location and it drops its full payload on that location. This is the same thing we have now. Passive you send a plane to a location and it patrols the grid for 45 seconds or so searching for subs. If it finds one it can then attack it on its own with half its payload if its early in its patrol and then come back for a second strike or it can dump its full payload if it was near the end of its patrol. The idea being you force the subs to stay submerged reducing their speed and vision or risk having a bomber locate you and engage you. This is a absolute over due change to BBs it would allow them to set up a ASW picket line and retreat from the sub, something they cannot do now. It has never been right that a 30 knot bb once latched onto by a stalking sub is unable to disengage for the rest of the match.

  16. @broccanmacronain457

    Many years ago I was a player in a modified version of SFBANG (miniature WW2 ship combat). The person who ran it was a stickler for accuracy in the stats of the ships. The reason I bring this up is that we found that the Japanese DDs (my usual foe) and the Russian DDs (that would be me) were notoriously bad in anti-submarine action due to the lack of depth charges carried on board. My destroyers were always out of them with only a couple of runs making them useless in their escort duties. My point in bringing this up is that it does not seem like WG (which does not surprise me) is using historical references to determine which DDs should be buffed and which ones should not be buffed. As a submariner, I do agree that depth charge damage should be increased, especially from a direct hit.

    • Historically the Italian DDs did not even have Sonar. In the game subs are way too fast. And maybe torpedos too (ship speeds are not to scale either). Also if they wanted to be historically accurate the torpedoes should leave tracks on the surface so a DD could run down the trails to where the sub fired the torpedoes. (only the ship launched IJN type 93s, late in the war they did have some oxygen wakeless torps though, and the German electric torpedoes did not leave trails.)

      Before the USN fixed their torpedoes, the optimum distance to launch a sub torpedo was 1,100 yards. (just a bit more than half a nautical mile) This was to match the poor depth keeping of the torps and at that range the torp would be near the depth set not ten, or more, feet above or below.

    • @broccanmacronain457

      Most of what you are saying I have been saying since before Subs even appeared, though I did not know about the Italian DD’s lack of sonar. I also do not think they should be homing torpes.

    • @@broccanmacronain457 Yes, Mussolini’s mis adventures in Africa made Italy a bit of a pariah in Europe so the other nations would not share technology with them. Though Germany did later.

    • @broccanmacronain457

      @@frosty3693 Sorta like Turkey in WW1

  17. The speed of the subs vs the time it takes a DD to get close enough depth charge them has been broken from the start. Then BBs and cruisers howled that they could not counter subs at all so they got airstrike depthcharges so they could hit subs easier than a DD can. Plus the DD often gets so close to the sub that it stands a good chance of accidentaly ramming it and takeing a huge amount of damage. The WG workers who developed this mess need to be sent to the Ukrainian front armed with a cap pistol.

    With their crewing smoke and speed boost, Italian DDs are much better at running down subs. The rather slow IJN DDs can just be painful to try.

    Subs like the old CVs need a total rework. WG needs to step back and see where they went wrong and start over if they want subs in the game, and keep regular players.

    So a DD can blap a sub now. What is new? A broadside cruiser can get erased by a large cruiser or BB. A torp DD, or Paolo Emilio can dumpster a BB at close range. You wan subs as protected as CVs????

    If I wanted to play a sub I would launch my copy of “Silent Hunter”.

  18. That Gearing in that game really was useless. He kept saying how bad the team was but he wasn’t doing the one fundamental thing that he should have done: spot. Then started crying when he left his smoke in the cap. Gearing is not a bad DD, that guy just sucked at playing it.

  19. @bustermorley8318

    I have noticed with the new commonwealth cruisers that submarines now give me a wide berth. In fact now I actively go looking for them. Suits me fine.

  20. Instead of adding more charges they should have increased the damage and the cone. DD charges should be more powerful than plane based to compensate for the risk.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *