World of Warships – Making It “Work”

38,380 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4,005 votes, average: 4.94 out of 5)
Loading...

Close Ad ×

Winning harder than you to, the return of Angry Turtle and why Wargamings’ definition of “making it work” may differ from that of the rest of the English speaking world.

Merchandise!
https://teespring.com/stores/mighty-jingles-salt-mine-eu
https://teespring.com/stores/mighty-jingles-salt-mine-na

If you have a World of Warships replay, consider using a hosting service like https://replayswows.com/

Just be aware that I get hundreds of emails every week and I canR;t promise that I’ll show what you send in.

72 Comments:

  1. The reason that subs are useless is bc they only counter BBs, but LITERALLY everything else does that anyway…

    • That’s mostly because BBs if they get a shot also tend to counter everything that has a citadel, I mean look at the state of T5 Cruisers, or really just Cruisers in general. Though funnily enough even with how fast the subs are, battleships are still faster, so if you can get parked above one, you can force them to surface and your secondary’s will eat them alive even if you aren’t secondary built because of the splash damage. I did this on the test server and it was funny as hell, watching the poor little U-190 try to get away from my Amagi, as I just hovered over him until he ran out of time, he was dead before my guns could turn from straight ahead to pointed at him.

  2. And to add to Wargaming’s stupidity an aircraft carrier has NEVER been sunk by a submarine in history before. Wait… oh yeah…

  3. Talking about “homing torpedoes”. They were “fire and forget” (and pray they did not mistake your own engine sounds for the target, and homed in on you). They were unable to gather feedback from submarine after launch to get a better target solution or what. The whole torpedo-thingy is backwards and flawed from the inception. First there should be pings to get a target solution, then the torpedo should be launched. This could easily be remedied with having the ping-mechanic work on the aiming cone. 0 pings: no cone. 1 ping: wide cone. 2 pings: narrow cone.

    WoWS is not trying to cram a square peg in a round hole, they’re cramming in a submarine-shaped object through a tightened anal sphincter, using meathooks to enlargen/rip the hole a bit for the conning tower to fit. At least they figured out that pushing them in sideways doesn’t work.

    • and Battleships gunners were deemed amazing if they attained about 5% hit ratio. 95% of DD’s in the game did not carry torpedo reloads. CV had to turn into the wind to launch/recover planes. active sooner would not detect torpedoes passive sonar was what would be needed and good luck with that on a ship going fast. Sonar did not really work on anything above about 10knots till towed array sonar was reinvented in the 1960s (was first ussud then forgotten in WW1) This is an arcade game

    • Ah – the Goatse approach.

    • @Tim Colpman problem is that this game is based on reality and the rules of reality now I fully understand that you need to “modify” reality a bit to make it into a arcade

    • Ambassador of REEE

      What’s more fun than to sink your own ship with your own torpedoes 😀

    • @Per Johansson since when??.. Ive been here since Alpha (weekend tester) apart from ship models there has almost never reality in this game.. Its an Arcade game for god sake.

  4. Oh god Schrader
    It’s been years and I still know who he is

  5. Don’t forget Jingles. The reason they got rid of friendly fire was due to subs. They were afraid we would just blow them outta the water at the beginning of the game. Sad thing is, they were right for once!!!

    • You know how it is, people would randomly teamkill artillery in World of Tanks before they took away friendly fire.

    • Yep the number of times I have been depth charged by my own team as they try to kill the submarine I am stalking. I’d be dead every time.

    • @David Whitfield why do you think they did not have subs hunt subs but left it to the destroyers? There was one recorded underwater submarine on submarine kill in WW2 – hey but historical realism counts doesn’t it.

    • @Graham Brown Sorry I meant in game. Yes I am well aware of the British submarine (HMS Venturer) that made history of sinking a German submarine (U-864) under water. Yes in game Subs can sink subs and I have done so but its not easy. You need to be at least a km away to allow your torps to lock on (unless your up against a bot who stays straight and level). Many players are frustrated that they miss a sub at point black range and this is because the torps fail to lock on and they are at the wrong depth. I found that torps rarely change depth unless they have a bit of time. Shooting at surface ships submerged is also rarely successful for the same reason. I also found that when I was dealing with a damaged sub it was easier to just yolo in and ram the sub with mine. As long as I was full health he would explode and I would survive. I can see the ramming flags being used by sub captains a lot.

    • @Stark Raven Not just artillery. I gave up on the game pretty early on after some asshole followed me around from game to game and just lit up my light or medium in the starting zone as soon as the match began. Ten seconds in, and the match is over for me because of some psycho griefer.

  6. jokerspet karlsson

    i realy like the new jingles aproach to WG titles. the honesty and complet lack of regard for the company is verry refreshing! 😀

  7. Can we as a community make it a goal to keep pushing for the game to be rebranded from PEGI 7?

  8. Speak of the devil – was just watching a NA stream where Angry Turtle popped up on one of the teams, not an hour before watching this video – and he was true to form.
    Does it mean I’m getting old, that I instantly recognized who Schrader was?

  9. I love how he hides, then activates a smokescreen, IN THE MOST OBVIOUS OF PLACES!! As if he thought they were going to ignore the mysterious cloud of smoke at the bottom of the map. What’s even funnier…is how those two turned as one TOWARDS the smoke like “hmm, I wonder what could be in this smokescreen that makes absolutely no sense of being here”.

    Edit: okay, just watched the bit about submarines…as a submariner, this pisses me off.

    • Here, we see that Angry Turtle has mastered the first art of not being seen: not standing up. He has, however, chosen a very obvious hiding spot.

  10. I like this new Jingles – free from the shackles of WG. He can now brutalise WG and their decisions and not feel obligated to apologise for it. Love it.

    • @N YT21 if you can’t see the clock at the top corner of the screen is ticking down because of the “heat of battle” then you are a crap player who has difficulty chewing gum and walking at the same time. What level of rocket surgeon is required to look up and see how many points your team has compared to the other and how much time is left in the game. Never mind that the Ibuki hadn’t been firing AT ALL up until that time, so how much in the “heat of battles” was he?

    • @Niek Kuik He rarely “shames” people for such things. He pokes fun at them.
      The first clip for example, I couldn’t tell whether the Ibuki had to engage because the enemy was in their cap or not. Not sure Jingles could but in the end it’s true that he lost his team the game because he did something instead of doing nothing.
      Shaming Angry_Turtle is just fair game IMHO.

    • @Timothy House Sometimes I find it difficult without addons to tell which way points will end up with the remaining time.
      I’d probably be better at it if I had played the game in recent years of course.

    • Hell yea, it’s like an actual sailor off duty, resting on a bench peacefully spouting whatever comes to mind

  11. Warships is more enjoyable now that the ruler of the salt mines doesn’t have to watch his words. Don’t ever change Jingles.

    • I think this is one of Jingles best vids…. As you said, he don’t need to hold back, or try and censor him self. Well, long as he don’t brake youtube rules that is… LOL

  12. Speaking of logics and realism, we’re talking about a game where a warship fires faster when she’s full of holes and her crew is 90% dead, just because her captain has anger management issues… 🤔

    • and where subs are faster than most DD’s with their engine booster active

    • @Shaw Fujikawa More like a DD with the reputation of a CV. (I was going to say “bad CV” but, all CV’s are bad anyway, so….) And they have the advantage of stealth much more than a DD or CV.

    • Cv stealthier than a DD, wth are you smoking? You can see plenty of CV at what is somewhere between CA to BB ranges bro…

    • @Paddington WoT has tank crews so, what’s the problem with ship crews?

    • @Nick I think, and I could be wrong, that commenter meant that it’s all well and good to say you don’t like subs (or CVs, presumably) and note that they objectively aren’t implemented well.

      But to say that the problem is “muh realism” is disingenuous at best when examined against the backdrop of the entire game.

  13. On your little story about using DCP to clear pings, and the crew using hammers and wooden wedges – way back in ancient times, during one patrol on the first submarine I was assigned to, we had one sonar operator who claimed he kept hearing noise transients coming from our machinery in the engineroom, on the hull mounted hydrophones. At least once a week, he’d call back claiming to hear a transient, and we’d have to spend a good part of the watch trying to chase it down – but we’d never find anything that was causing the noise he claimed to hear.
    About two thirds of the way thru that patrol, one of our Engineroom Supervisors decided he’d had enough of this nonsense. The next time said sonar operator called back claiming to hear a noise, the ERS acted all enthusiastic with him over the phone about chasing this noise down. He asked him exactly which hydrophone he was picking the noise up on, and at what location it was on the hull, supposedly to look in that specific location to find what was causing the noise.
    The ERS went to the spot next to where said hydrophone was located. He then called up the sonar operator, and told him “I think I’ve found the problem, but you need to listen closely. Make sure you’re listening to that specific hydrophone, and you have the volume turned up”.
    Once receiving assurances from the sonar operator that he was doing exactly as instructed, our ERS picked up a 2 pound sledgehammer and smacked the living hell out of the hull several times, right at the spot where the hydrophone was located.
    We never heard so much as a peep out of that sonar operator for the rest of that patrol.

  14. I met Angry Turtle for the first time in game just 2 days ago. I was lucky he was on the enemy team. I don’t know if he spammed the chat or anything of that nature being on the opposing team but he did sit in spawn for the first 5 minutes and then precede to sail his BB into the middle of the map and die spectacularly. It was a ranked match.

  15. If you want a “dedicated troll” Jingles I’m sure there would be many volunteers, lol.

    The more I see of the changes WG have made to this game the less likely it is that I’ll ever bother going back to playing it.

    • Like Jingles said he has many friends that occasionally troll him. Finding a true douche canoe that has staying power is much harder, because, well, I guess you get the idea about “staying power” and “internet trolls”.

  16. That satanic laughter after having said: “You really picked the bad time to pop up on my radar,” is golden.

  17. Submarines, so far, are an even bigger mess than CVs were after their rework:

    1. Submarines don’t abide by the same rules other Classes do, they’re the only Class in the game that can become completely undetectable by going to Maximum Depth. No Hydro, Radar or even Proximity Spotting can reveal their position at those depths. ONLY other Submarines can Proximity Spot other Submarines. If a Submarine doesn’t want to be spotted, it can do it and there’s absolutely nothing surface Ships can do about it. And if you think Maximum Depth is good only for running and hiding, you’d be wrong, because it can be used offensively too. Since not even Hydro or Proximity Spotting can detect a Submarine at those depths, it can unapologetically sneak up on unsuspecting Ships, surface, shotgun the enemy ship with its torpedoes and quickly re-submerge, and if the enemy has no ASW there is absolutely nothing they can do to punish the Submarine aside from getting a few Secondary hits in before the Submarine disappears.

    2. Only half of the Ships in the game have ASW armaments. This is absolutely unacceptable, can you imagine if they introduced CVs and only gave half of the Ships AA telling the other half that “they can still use their guns to kill the CV”. EVERY Ship should have ASW, just like every Ship should have AA, there is no discussing this point, it’s just facts. You can give certain Ships better or worse ASW, but they all should have some way of confronting Submarines instead of being forced to wait MINUTES for a Submarine to finally run out of Battery and surface.

    3. Periscope Depth, and I see a lot of people overlooking this issue. After the last the Submarine Test, WarGambling rightfully decided that Submarines out-spotting DDs probably isn’t the best design choice, given that DDs are a Class built almost entirely around their concealment. So this time around WarGambling made the appropriate changes, at least on the surface, literally. Because while Submarines may no longer out-spot DDs on the Surface, they still out-spot them by several Kilometers while at Periscope Depth AND even if they do get spotted by Radar or Hydro they can just go to Maximum Depth and disappear completely, rendering any potential counter-play almost completely impossible.

    4. Torpedo arming time, another mostly overlooked issue. Submarine torpedoes have almost no arming time, which lets them pull of ridiculous stunts like shotgunning DDs trying to approach them to drop their ASW charges and because WarGambling made Submarines relatively fast and maneuverable it’s not easy to get on their flank to prevent them from doing that, especially when you have to dodge fire from other Ships while doing it. Submarines already get the benefit of having the best concealment out of any Class, an on-demand “Smoke” functionality in the form of Maximum Depth, immunity to CVs/ships with no ASW armaments and lightning speed homing torpedoes…do they really need they ability to shotgun ships that are supposed to counter them at point blank range?

    5. Team Slots. Submarines do not share Slots with DDs, which means that in Ranked you can end up on a team with 3 DDs, 2 Submarines and a CV, leaving only 1 Slot open for either a BB or a Cruiser. This is absolutely ridiculous, unless they make Submarines and DDs share team slots, the matches are going to revolve around invisible warfare and plane spotting, no BB or Cruiser player is going to subject themselves to such nonsense.

    Then you have all the issues Jingles and other community members have mentioned like the laughable reliance on DCP to remove Pings etc.

    Submarines in their current iteration are a complete mess, a mess that will turn Random Battles into an even bigger shit-show than it currently is. Anyone who thinks that Submarines are even CLOSE to being balanced, is delusional.

    • This isn’t a historical game, never was, never will be.

      The purpose of giving every ship ASW is the same as giving every ship AA, to have a fair playing field. You can’t argue this point, this is just a fact of proper game design.

      Your point about ASW on every ship somehow reducing the ship variety is so stupid that it’s actually self-refuting.

    • @Verde

      A) WG go to great lengths to present ships as they really appeared and tie them to their historical counterparts. The dockyard narrator loves to recount how ships match their configuration at commissioning, with available upgrades to mirror how the ship changed in its service life. If you now claim they do not intend the game to be historically accurate you either prove their mendacity, or are mistaken.

      B) historically, nearly every ship DID have at least some AA armament, even in 1918. So there’s nothing ahistorical about every ship in the game having at least some form of AA.

      C) remember when some ships were REALLY good at AA but mediocre-at-best at everything else, and people still played them because their AA made them useful? Then carriers and aircraft mechanics got reworked and now nobody plays those ships because their AA is barely better than anything else and everything else is better in all other ways.

      If only certain classes e.g. DDs and CLs have ASW, it will encourage players to use those ships when they might otherwise not, because they would fill a need that no other class can. If instead we have Hippers and Iowas and Midways (that is, ships that are already good at things other than ASW) dropping depth bombs, what’s the point of playing anything else? Who would choose to play a ship that is highly capable at ASW but m’eh in other areas if *every ship* can do ASW?

    • Ambassador of REEE

      @Verde Well on the point of every ship having AA, that’s not true. There are a few ships that has absolutely no AA that can meet carriers in the game.
      I know this because I own one, forgot wtf it’s name was but it’s a premium/gift battleship.

    • Only a very select few of LOW TIER Ships don’t have any AA, they are an exception to the rule at tiers where there isn’t even a semblance of balance because WarGambling doesn’t care about low tier since that’s not where they make their money and the potatoes playing there don’t care about fair play either.

      At higher tiers, EVERY ship has AA, not that it helps much because there is no ship in the game that can, on its own, protect itself against a semi-decent, determined CV. If a CV wants you dead, you will die (unless you’re a Submarine of course, they can become completely immune to CVs) and the only thing you can do about it is delay the inevitable or spot and sink the CV before it sinks you.

      In case of Submarines it’s far worse, because if you spot a CV, you can sink it, if you spot a Submarine, you can sink it ONLY if your ship is equipped with ASW armaments AND you’re at the correct distance – with Depth Charges you have to be on top of a Submarine and with ASW planes you have to be away because you can’t drop them on your position. AND on top of that, if you fail to sink the Submarine with your opportunistic attack, it will go to Maximum Depth and run away.

      When a Class you want to introduce has even more survivability crutches than a CV, you know you did something wrong in the design phase.

    • @Verde

      Well, yeah, on that we agree. As Jingles said, subs in and of themselves are a flawed concept within the fabric of WoWs as it exists.

      Putting subs on a footing that makes them playable and relevant required substantial jimmery-jammery, which has had the knock-on effect of either bringing all other classes (except CVs of course) to their knees, or demanding those other classes receive their own jimmery-jammery.

      I wonder if WG’s owners have decided to ruin their games deliberately, implode the company, and use the losses in some elaborate tax scheme?

  18. Love the fact that you obviously don’t feel a need to restrain yourself anymore with regards to WG. Better than ever Jingles. 👍

  19. The dubs are a massive success. So many more players are playing them than they used to. You know back when they didn’t exist. Clearly a win in WGs book

  20. Jingles: Here we have an Ibuki failing at doing nothing. Angry turtle will now demonstrate for us how to successfully do nothing.

Leave a Reply

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