World of Warships – Two Pings Only

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4,397 votes, average: 4.93 out of 5)

Close Ad ×

Submarine Test #3 is up! Yeah, I know, we weren’t expecting it either. Actually, I have a theory about that…

All music licensed from and



  1. Can’t wait to see how this mistake plays out.

  2. USS Cash-a-Lot … Coincidence?

  3. Assured detectability probably means at surface level?

    Edit – this point was made before hearing that they can no longer submerge. So question answered.

  4. I suspect the timing was a question of “shove out the latest build, let them test it over Christmas, look at the results when we get back”.

    Edit: The Dive! Dive! Dive! mission was to get the U-69. Accounts from the previous tests carried over, so we kept our mission progress and subs.

    • Did they REALLY need to use the number “69” for that u-boat? Seriously, Wargaming, enough KINKYLOVING the playerbase!

    • I’m disappointed that you can’t fully surface, and even more disappointed that they won’t let you use the 88 Flak gun on the deck of the U-boats. I would love to kill carriers and destroyers with the deck gun

    • @Yuzral Wouldn’t exactly be the first time, lol

    • @Ellerion3 U-69 was the lead ship of the Type VII-C U-Boats. And I’m sure that will absolutely, positively, definitely, beyond a shadow of a doubt and without question be the only explanation for the choice of number.


    • @Yuzral Except that all the people who are testing it are the same folks who are screaming about the PR fiasco; you know, like Jingles, Flamu, et al? So if they are talking about subs, then they are not talking about the PR. I think PrivatePublisk and Cranius Dominus are both probably right on.

  5. All subs are going to be perfectly balanced premium ships that’ll be even more expensive than the Puerto Rico – in that context, Cachalot should be renamed to Cash-a-lot 🙂

  6. They rushed the sub test to cover up the PR dumpster fire. That simple.

    • Maybe to distract them from playing for the PR altogheter

    • A test like this with no obvious marketing would not be used as a diversion for a PR failure like the Puerto Rico incident. War gaming may make bad decisions but they aren’t stupid. This just seems like a normal development update according to their schedule. Maybe with a bit of poor communication between teams.

    • It’s not exactly a secret… jingles didn’t patent the idea for himself… literally everyone with half a brain can deduce that WG desperately wants attention shifted away from their biggest mistake. And I’m pretty sure jingles doesn’t care if you take his idea. If anything I’m sure he’d rather have people spread the word

    • I bet you’re right. PR dumpster fire… quick! Give them something else to bitch about. What do we have in the dumbshit queue? Never change WG. Never change.

    • If this was meant to distract from the Christmas event then why didn’t they tell anyone it was coming?

  7. i assume WG is trying to divert attention from the shitstorm called puerto rico?

    • By reminding everyone about another shitstorm called “WG’s game balance logic”?

    • Not with the lack of communication and advertising of the updated build. Regardless of what’s going on with Puerto Rico, there’s other teams with their own deadlines to meet.

  8. That moment when flamu realised he had been rammed by jingles underwater

  9. Why is there such a stat difference between the Cachalot and U-69?

    Well, that’s easy, Jingles. They haven’t decided on the final balancing, so they want to test out two different balance levels at the same time.

    Makes sense in at least two ways, really.

    First, they don’t have to go through the trouble of setting up two sessions of the testing, making changes and testing again. Second, and this is directly a result of the former, they can also test both stat lines on roughly the same player base, under the same circumstances. Rather than looking at two entirely separate sets of results, they’re looking to see the two compete in the same environment, to see which ‘food chain’ they think is more healthy for the game, overall.

    • Cranius Dominus I’m agreeing with you. I’m not trying to measure experience.

    • @Shea Samuels Sorry if it came across like that.

      I just felt like I was being given too much credit for an observation that is, in fact, blindingly obvious to anyone with the right background.

    • Cranius Dominus not too much credit, just reinforcing the point for those in the comments section without the same background.

    • Giving wargaming that much credit seems unfair. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the German sub is the stupid weak one.

    • Well, that’s easy. No submarines. Same principle applies to WoT, no wheeled vehicles.

  10. WG using problems they created to justify something? No, they’d never do that, right? Lol.

    • I remember when players were complaining about HE spam and multiple fires so WG solved the issue of flooding being active for too long. At least nobody complains about HE spam anymore and we all live in a perfectly balanced utopia

  11. Rip BBs this will be World of subs

    • CallioNyx this is WG we’re talking about. Their decision making is fucking retarded.

    • The Majestic Phoenix

      @electric dildo What this guy said. Also, its not just BBs, even DDs will get absolutely fucked and they’re already fucked when CVs appear in their games. Have you seen how their torpedoes turn?! Like sidewinders!

    • Agreed. When they improved German BB gun accuracy I was immediately suspicious. Now I get it. Well played WG. Well played. Wait until the world’s most amazing Soviet subs get introduced. Stalin-guided torpedoes should be hilarious.

  12. As someone who had realism problems with not being able to fire torps while surfaced…. WHUUUUUAAAAAAAAA????

  13. Flamu provided enough salt for a week’s quota there.

  14. Breaks my heart everytime I think all these creative people are working hard to create those gorgeous cutscenes.
    Meanwhile the upper management keeps making shit decisions.

    • Just remember,

      The community is the ones who wanted submarines.

      WG didn’t want to add them.

    • DDs got absolutely nerfed to the ground with all the sonar and radar bullshit, planes etc.. BBs are the strongest class in the game since the beginning, now BBs will have an actual counter. I hope the submarines will be strong in this game to wreck havock upon these campers in BBs on the other end of the map.

    • @Liquid Man! Yeah I like SS being deadly to BBs and CVs, but right now in test 3 they´re just way too strong and game breaking.

  15. Fast on surface – (very) Slow under water
    Deck gun and AA on surface.
    Torps on surface – Torps at Periscope depth
    Deep water torps when diving deep

    No homo torp (but can fire torp spreads) (also have bow and stern torps)
    Oxygen / battery runs out to prevent subs hiding at depth for whole game. (can run at surface and Periscope depth as much as they like)
    3 Depths – Surface, Periscope, “Deep”

    Subs can be shot on surface and at Periscope

    When Deep …
    DD and CA have depth charges with a cool down (similar to torps) to attack deep subs
    CV – Planes can attack deep subs
    BB – shit out of luck vs Deep subs

    • Also I think subs should have less visibility when at periscope depth than surfaced. It’s somewhat realistic (since you can’t see as far lower down due to the curvature of the earth causing the horizon to drop off quicker) and would provide some incentive to surface occasionally. It could be done as a simple percentage drop in detectability or else as a set distance limit (much like with current 8km storms).

    • @Shea Samuels The reason for the Deck gun.
      1) Historical 2) It joins the sub to the same game play style of the other ships in game.
      3) If you see a ship on a slither of health you can rise the sub and try to take it out with the deck gun.

    • Dubble Twice I agree with the sentiment and the consistent gameplay systems, however I have to respectfully disagree that it would serve any actual purpose in actual gameplay. Subs normally only had a single deck gun no larger than 150mm. I’d take the Mutsuki’s armament over that. Remember, you aren’t trying to sink a merchant ship, but a fully fledged warship. It would be a gimmick at best in practice considering a sub’s low health, fear of getting depth charged as soon as it gets detected, and how armor scales by tier along with HE pen mechanics. They’d need 1/4 pen at best to be as consistent as you’d want in order for its intended use.

    • WW2 subs would have have to be adjusted for an arcade game. But even then itshould be a bit like CV play were the captain is looking at the map and picking spots for ambushes. More for the think ahead type of player if you will.

    • Note that not all subs had rear tubes.
      Also, the advantage German subs had really was their surface speed and dive times. 30 seconds was common for trained crews. ( T3 or T4 skill for sure ) Not sure how quick they should be in the game, but they need an advantage. They really were superior in most aspects. The problem was really just far too few to keep up with their opponents. ( same with tanks – though WoT laughably ignores this )

  16. Previous videos: “Don’t worry kids, these homing torpedoes are NOT Mk48 ADCAP’s”
    Jingles today: “These are like Mk 48 ADCAP’s…”

    • @Cason Grumbles Mk48 ADCAPs are incapable of doing that.

    • Submarine Wahoo called sarcasm

    • @Submarine Wahoo Mk48s are entirely capable of taking a U-turn. A circle search is one mode of operation for them.

    • @Cason Grumbles then put “(!)” at the end xD

    • ​@Submarine Wahoo Only manned torpedoes can do that sort of rapid adjustments. Yes, they required a person to usually sacrifice themselves, since they were piloted like a boat, if they expected it to explode on impact. Most designs use a means to attach a charge directly to the ship’s hull and get away to a safe distance afterwards with the piloted portion. As far as I know, only the Japanese designs expected the pilots to die with the torpedo. There are varying reports of how effective they were.

  17. “before we start grabbing our pitchforks and torches”- i’m pretty sure most of the playerbase didnt even have time to put them down after the whole Payto Rico and NTC Legendary module stuff.

    Edit: forgot a word.

  18. Hey World of Warships, Cold Waters called, they said they want their guided torpedoes back.

    • I wonder if BBs could have some kind of anti-sub scout plane as an option. I don’t know if such ever existed, but I think BBs should have at least small chance of winning, if it’s 1v1. Maybe it could be a option instead of the fighter or scout. Or an ability to call in a anti-sub scout from beyond the border just like the carriers with their fighter-cover ability.
      If BBs would be able to hit subs with HE even if it hits just close by, it would benefit the game as well, because some other captain skills would now become interesting

    • @JayPhi2 yeah, battleships certainly could load their scout planes for ASW purposes. Like when HMS Warspite sent her Walrus out to scout in the Fjords and it found a submarine to sink.

      So historically it makes sense for BBs to have ASW planes and I agree with your idea to have them.

    • @JayPhi2 That’s actually already there. Quote from the sub test patchnotes:
      If a submarine is detected with the help of the Fighter or Spotting Aircraft consumables, the planes will start to follow it. They will circle over its last spotted location if the submarine dives.

    • No they don’t. KFG is finished with that game. The devs that worked on it aren’t even with KFG anymore. One I know is working on a game like Fleet Command. Just give me a Virginia from the Playable Subs mod and I’ll have those old diesel boats too busy dying to be a problem.

  19. So, make them outrageously OP so everyone buys them and then nerf the shit out of them? wow its as if they did this before…….(cough CV rework…)

  20. “Comrade Uri, players very angry about Puerto Rico, much negative publicity!”
    “Idiot! Don’t just stand there, give them something else to be angry about!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.