World of Warships Colorado Colorado Ranked Battles

But having these 31kts underwater speedboats in the game still feels kinda weird and does not fit the game's meta until the format is sufficiently increased. I appreciate that WG put so much effort into the underwater engine and the mechanics and this PTS test was a LOT better than any earlier variation of submarines. Cause by that logic we would already need a rebalance for all the current ships, because a new class is introduced, yet the ITA, GER, SOV BBs did not get anything. And 'No', your answer from an earlier Q&A, that this format would require a complete rebalance is simply not valid. The only solution I see is to reserve 2 slots exclusively for subs and expand the game to 14v14 (as long as subs are in the queue), but your servers probably cannot handle that. If you bring subs to random battle later, we will face the same issue: 12v12 will have 4 less surface ships, which will drag games out. The ITA, GER and SOV BBs did not get the ASW strike ability, so they will be hit especially hard, cause they have no way to attack subs. This also means fewer targets, which will directly cut into the xp gained by classes which are not specialized sub hunters. How many slots does this leave for BBs or Cruisers? 2!! This will be a very empty ranked season. Then add in the possibility of a CV and 1-2 DDs. But the main issue I see with bringing them to ranked is that it will thin out the field a lot.ħv7 means that if each side brings 2 subs, a typical BB or Cruiser will only see 5 ships. PTS, which is full of bots, really wasn't a good indicator for sub's effects on the game, cause players on PTS usually yolo and the bots are braindead. I played a lot of subs in the early tests and during the recent 2 PTS sessions and ranked out.

World of Warships Colorado Colorado Ranked Battles