Gato - The overpowered american submarine that shotguns ships left, right and center

[@hagostaeldmann]

10 gearing torps every 45s with 2km concealment is perfectly balanced, no complaints will be tolerated

[@StuartKoehl]

The Gearing used the Mk.XV torpedo, which had a maximum range of 15,000 meters at low speed (31 knots). It was seldom used at ranges beyond 6000 meters, at the high speed setting of 45 knots. Until 1943, it suffered from many of the same defects as the submarine-launched Mk.XIV.

[@thedon9670]

@@StuartKoehl /whoosh

[@Edi_J]

I'm really surprised that they didn't make a Soviet sub so OP.

[@StuartKoehl]

@@Edi_J Soviet subs of the era were pretty poor. The post-war Whisky class, which drew heavily on German Type XXI technology, was still inferior to the U.S. Guppy conversions, particularly in silencing and sensors.

[@Edi_J]

@@StuartKoehl Everything Soviet of the era was crap or not existing, yet it doesn't matter for WeeGees.

[@StuartKoehl]

A typical torpedo spread for a U.S. fleet submarine in World War II was three torpedoes, aimed for the bow, amidships and astern. Since the most common fire control error was target speed estimation, this meant if the submarine underestimated target speed, one or two torpedoes would pass astern, while the third would hit. If it overestimated target speed, one or two torpedoes would miss ahead, while the third would hit. Either way, the sub was guaranteed at least one hit. For large merchantmen and major naval vessels like carriers, battleships and heavy cruisers, a sub might fire all its bow tubes, in the hope of scoring enough hits to sink or incapacitate the target. The stern tubes could be used to re-attack if the first salvo did not put down the enemy, As a general rule, a destroyer could survive one hit, a cruiser could survive two, while a carrier or battleship could absorb half a dozen with ease--unless (as happened with the IJN Kongo), the torpedo defeats the side protection system and lights up a magazine.

[@emilyhofland8219]

Next on, news you can't use.

[@garethlowe86]

I encountered a Gato today and it’s the closest I got to uninstalling the game. Completely broken.

[@desertfoxmj7148]

yeah subs make the game wayyyyy less fun.

[@samuelhakansson6680]

You should have uninstalled it. I dont get why people talk about uninstalling, yet rarely do. Personally I did and havent looked back since. My time is worth more than playing such a trash game.

[@CesarinPillinGaming]

"We made sure the older subs couldn't shotgun as easily, thats why we made a premium ship you can buy where you can shotgun almost every single ship in game with a single salvo"

[@3idraven714]

Gato Class (72 were built), some of the highest scoring boats (tonnage) were Gato Class boats. Half of the sub losses were Gato Class boats.

[@Xoliapydon]

This is how it was like to play Kamikaze back in the day. Fun times

[@KaguyasBeat]

I don't care how broken someone thinks something in the game is - Stream Sniping is straight up cheating. Guy got what he deserved. Glad you were able to still get the CV afterwards to.

[@warsh1p234]

rules thrown out the window when it comes to submarine players

[@TrailblazerAlpha]

What if he was not stream sniping? There is a high chance that he was using depth charge planes to check for the destroyer if it was going through there to flank him, and caught trenlass by pure coincidence.

[@KaguyasBeat]

@@TrailblazerAlpha Are you serious? With the amount that guy dropped on him with dead on accuracy are you kidding me right now? Lmao no.

[@TrailblazerAlpha]

@@KaguyasBeat Watch the video again and tell me how many times did he drop depth charges on him accurately.

[@KaguyasBeat]

@@TrailblazerAlpha Are you actually seriously this dented? Guessing the general area as accurately as he did makes zero sense with the fact the sub was NEVER DETECTED. If the subs surface surveillance works on other submerged subs that's news to me. The activation of his own sonar consumables confirms that with the lack of detection of the enemy sub which what do you know: Is also a Gato. He wasn't dropped once, twice, but THREE times while undetected. The fourth before he died is the only one that makes sense cuz the torpedoes were spotted, at which point he was screwed. He took direct damage from the second drop. Woohoo. So why the hell is the guy so accurately guessing where the sub is EVERY SINGLE TIME HE TRIED TO ACTUALLY END UP DOING DAMAGE EVEN ONCE? Even after the damage there was no oil slick, instant DCP. It's not hard. Look at the painfully obvious evidence. Do you understand how detection in this game works? Clearly not.

[@tahiribnmohammad5410]

it's sad that streamers are playing these ships, I could understand for animal research. But yeah, so many complain about cv's and subs, yet play them with a passion

[@mikewilson3169]

Did you know that the Balao class came after the Gato class, and was superior to it?

[@StuartKoehl]

Balao seems to be represented in a post-War GUPPY I configuration, including streamlined sail and high speed battery array.

[@TheTokkin]

Exciting gameplay (Nope)

[@CatOfSchroedinger]

Enemy sub was in the south. Died there when you were almost caught by SunYatSen. It would be great if WG could create some kind of "almost detected" sign or something (for subs as well as surface ships) when a sub uses its surface hydro. .. Vice versa, I have difficulties seeing the DDs, subs etc. quickly, when using this hydro. The minimap is not useful, is it? And the tiny flash on the surface is only helpful, when you already look for it in that direction. (Please correct me if I'm wrong. Not that I'm going to play subs a lot soon - I'm in a single-person clan, so it will take me half a year or longer to acquire so much Steel for this ship, but I would like to know how to use this tool correctly.)

[@desertfoxmj7148]

it would be way more fun if they totally removed the sub from the game altogether, there are an awful odds of of options to make them *really balanced* and not *WG balanced* but removing them from the game is the best option to save the game.

[@rustysimonds5011]

you know you can use guided torps as dumbfire and they will still go as fast as the guided torps do and damage is exactly the same too, generally you also get longer ranges, so its better to dumb fire the guided torps using the same method as you would for dumbfire torps just better range, top speed and damage

[@rtc3]

12 min 225k and was never in any danger - much balance

[@hond654]

What if sub would lose situational awareness if it goes below 30m? Radio does not propagate under water very well. How about DDs having 0.5km detectability against subs? So many easy fixes, historically accurate.. Oh wait, this is WG...

[@Darren4352]

Dude, after 8 + years they still haven't done anything about radar and hydro having no line of sight restrictions. When they address those two basic common sense issues I would absolutely like to see loss of situational awareness for a sub that is submerged.

[@hond654]

@@Darren4352 Well, those are harder to fix (LOS computation) but depth should be easy to measure... A small step in the right direction would be nice. I got Alliance with 70m turning radius torps - hell, those are the stupidest things I have ever seen (ok, wait a bit longer and WG will add flying torps jumping out of the water so they can citadel from top)

[@desertfoxmj7148]

easiest fix for subs (and i gotta agree with your solutions though) hover your mouse on the sub category->click ctr+A-> click shift + delete uninstall if the problem persists.

[@Stolens87]

wow, these stream snipers are really the worst. I thought i forgot a mechanic because already at 3:15 they've already sent a squad of asw planes on your position....

[@tomhoni9642]

Sub vs CV : den Teufel mit dem Beelzebub austreiben ^^

[@sonnenwende5508]

LOL.

[@gamingrootz4411]

Should i get this or shika?

[@tuankiettran2079]

Name of a kind of cake "Gato", so delicious.

[@veselingramatikov]

Playing that sub should be illegal. I was almost killed yestarday from it. I take li 5-6 torps from nowhere, no ping, torps are extremely stealthy no time for reaction. Just so terrible. It`s is worse than cv. You dont have any contra move.

[@distant6606]

like you have any against cvs lmao

[@waffle3632]

Yeah it uses gearing torpedoes for the unguided ones so it's practically a torp boat on crack.

[@veselingramatikov]

@@distant6606 cv at least you see the planes hahha.... these torps. You dont see shit.

[@StuartKoehl]

Welcome to the real world of fighting against submarines. It's SUPPOSED to be unfair. It's supposed to be like clubbing baby seals. The presence of submarines should force people to adopt ASW formations, just as the presence of aircraft carriers should force people to adopt anti-aircraft formations.

[@AlexC-mu2cc]

It doesn't do anything but I get some catharsis from reporting every sub I see. Friendly and enemy. If you click "Battle" with one selected you're being toxic by default.

[@scousersuk]

Any build info for gato please

[@Melunios]

This submarine is like a cat xdd. This submarine is like a stealthy assasin but is actually a cat... Funny how also in Italian gato means cat.

[@MrLarzio]

This video gives me PTSD

[@sargisshirinyan207]

Gonna get this after I get the burger

[@ApeRSV4]

Is there anyway the Gato gets nerfed?

[@omgcamper5610]

no

[@StuartKoehl]

Well, you could reduce its speed to what it actually was: 20.5 knots surfaced and 9 knots submerged. And you could give its torpedoes a 50% dud rate.

[@MrDonleon65]

Not until wg have sold enough of this shit.

[@beherith2874]

@@StuartKoehl try 80%, Mk.14 skull emoji

[@BasJon]

@@MrDonleon65 Its not for sale for money, it cost steel you cannot buy steel.

[@dewannee]

And WG says this is "fine" 😁

[@cheungjackjackt02006]

shotgunning is not a problem they say

[@arkabhattacharjee776]

who made this thing , i mean i know someone at wargaming but i want to know the specific person :D

[@boristhebarbarian]

Will WG change Gato? because it seems so overpowered in this guise. I have enough steel to get 1 ship. Would be a waste if I got Gato only to have her hit by the ''balance hammer'' right after....

[@F350Z]

lmao same happened with me and the FDR

[@johny_doe]

straight line cv gamer 😂

[@jurijsoklic5026]

How would look if Gato and all subs in wows would play like silent hunter 3 or 4 realistic mode.

[@alphax4785]

They'd be completely non viable in anything other than their own mode aside from the U-2501 being marginally viable.

[@Krahamus]

Silent hunter series are simulator games, wows are an arcade game, it would not fit using SH mechanics in here, they need to remove homing torps, make subs slower underwater, but increase underwater time they can be or make it even infinite, give surface ships more hydro time or reduce cooldown time, so if sub detected it would be death sentence for them, would force people to use torps from long distance and play more carefully, and you would make less kills but get more points for spotting, anyways even if they get balanced people will still complain about things.

[@hansfrans761]

Subs are a great addition to the game.

[@desertfoxmj7148]

if someone is stream sniping he should be totally banned from playing the game. like that dude who presumably did so and stiiilllll got hilariously blown clean of the map in a devStrike. totally deserved it. still i am not getting Gato and am NOT grinding the subs. they make the game way less fun for average players like me. and they are in the game only for monetization factors, not to speak of not being fair nor nearly not historically accurate.

[@dislikecounter5191]

I'm guessing you blacklisted the cv cause he wrecked you. Had high caliber plus 80k damage so he's doing atleast 310k

[@StuartKoehl]

To me, it doesn't seem like the torpedoes are busted, so much as the fact that you get an unlimited number of them. You are typically shooting full spreads at large warships from ranges of less than 4000 meters. Under those circumstances, you ought to average 4 or more hits per salvo, so the modeling is just right. On the other hand, a Gato or Balao only carried 24 torpedoes, total, and you launched 47, which, if you did a volumetric analysis of the Gato class, would completely fill the inside of the pressure hull, leaving no room for engines, batteries, or crew.

[@hardkur]

you wanna tell me these game is not realistic? how dare you!

[@StuartKoehl]

@@hardkur I'm sorry, my blood just rushed to my head. I think I'll go lay down, now.

[@jacksons1010]

Ok, now tell us how many torpedo reloads WW2 DD’s actually carried. It’s an arcade-ish game, dude. Have a nice nap. 😊

[@StuartKoehl]

@@jacksons1010 American destroyers had none. The 16-tube DDs, which had two quad tubes on each side, in theory could launch one massive 16-torpedo salvo by using "curve ahead fire"; i.e., setting the gyro angles so that the torpedoes, once launched over the side, would turn towards the target bearing. In practice, this was seldom done, but rather, torpedoes would be launched from one side, with the other side serving as a de facto "second salvo". In the Bensons, Fletchers, Summers and Gearings, which had two quintuple tubes, it was usual to launch one five-fish salvo, and then re-attack with the second set of tubes. Late in the war, many lost their second set of torpedo tubes in favor of two more quad 40mm mounts. Japanese DDs DID carry reload torpedoes allowing a second attack to be delivered after temporarily withdrawing from battle. Usually, they carried a full second salvo, and Japanese torpedo tube mounts were designed specifically to allow reloading while under fire. Most other navies felt that a DD was just too lively to be reloading 3000-lb torpedoes while radically maneuvering on the open sea. Most navies did have a highly developed torpedo attack doctrine, which, inter alia, I have never seen anyone employ in World of Warships.

[@randyscraft]

Wtf a sub doing 34knots gearing torps 2km concealment total joke.

[@MrAlbutiu]

👌.

[@chamoy2k00]

Noice

[@worndown8280]

this boat is bad comedy

[@rungfang27]

Well the play testers aren't really good at the game, so these ships look normal to wg.

[@forge16hanadamaintenancedr43]

Doesn’t most of them just buy their way into it? Also the biggest source of paid actors. At least half of the testers I’ve encountered have their stats in the deep reds

[@DarkPeak76]

Sub main complaining about unfairness!😉

[@blackraen]

Sounds like we found the Sun-yat animal that couldn't even cheat effectively. Maybe next time, lol.

[@StuartKoehl]

War ain't supposed to be fair. Tactics is the art of being on the right side of an unfair fight.

[@DarkPeak76]

@@blackraen or just someone making a comment

[@warsh1p234]

@@StuartKoehl except this is a game

[@StuartKoehl]

@@warsh1p234 A game can be accurate, and enjoyable. And it wouldn't even have been that difficult.

[@kennkoala]

W.o.W's, the game which teaches Chinese Destroyer captains how to sail close to American Cruisers.

[@kliffrick]

Complain about cv's and play's subs, okay Dude 🤡

[@thumper7047]

Wait, what? Ur ina sub and your are badmouthing CVs?

[@trenlass809]

yes of course because cvs are the only global problem in battle while subs are local like any other class

[@TuneDownUtilities]

Seems very balanced when you can still kill the guy that knows exactly where you are with almost no repercussions. Who finds this content entertaining?

[@rolandhellmann3819]

More entertaining then cheaters in online games and streamsniper are cheaters.

[@MrDonleon65]

Wow complaining of steamsniper took 1% hp, how much fun did all your victims had? not like they could dodge that. Cc pushing this op shit.

[@stevenmuller1834]

last time i watched a vid at your channel, i really hate the sub-class in my favorit game and i dont like shown content, sry

[@trenlass809]

well it is your own choice :) thank you for watching before it!

[@TallulahSoie]

Just gonna be that guy but if anyone deserves to get sniped it's a sub or a cv. Shrug.

[@azathoth3700]

Nope. Do subs and CVs deserve to be hounded in-game and mercilessly destroyed? Sure! No-one should be CHEATING to do so though.

[@BloodHawk31]

Shotgunning is not a thing...I think stream sniper added balance.

[@TrailblazerAlpha]

I strongly believe that the Sun Yat Sen player was playing his game - using depth charge planes to see if there was a destroyer trying to flank him. You only got caught up by coincidence. Why do I believe this? I refuse to believe that if he was stream anipung, he was not pointing his guns straight at you and trying to shoot you with main guns. It was kinda toxic of you, ngl. Don't be like those CV mains please- you're better than that 😭😭😭

[@kclsevsw]

Once is a coincidence... no more no less

[@TrailblazerAlpha]

@@kclsevsw If you noticed, that sun yat sen was repeatedly using ASW planes towards a DD. 🗿

[@StuartKoehl]

For all the complaining, submarines are depicted far more accurately than aircraft carriers, albeit that ain't saying much. I laugh, because you guys sound just like the old battleship admirals in World War I complaining that submarines are damned ungentlemanly.

[@Talguy21]

Historical accuracy doesn't necessarily mean good game design. Neither aircraft carriers or submarines were a fair fight (in their intended operating conditions) for surface ships historically, and they're not here either. From a historicity standpoint, that's very well represented. This is, however, a multiplayer videogame, where counterplay and skill expression should be able to carry a sufficiently skilled player through a bad matchup. A CV can harass with infinite planes from unlimited range at zero personal risk with guaranteed damage while a sub can stealth zero-warning one-shot you. The complaining on both accounts is justified. Destroyers have to operate at much farther range, making torpedo travel time a significant and outplayable concern by keeping your course erratic. They also don't have an immediate turn invisible button without consequence- smoke screens don't move once deployed, making it either a sitting duck or a static vision-blocker. In real warfare, making a weapon without counterplay is ideal. You don't want the enemy to be able to fight back. But this isn't real warfare, both players should be able to have fun.

[@StuartKoehl]

@@Talguy21 I agree, but that is because Wargames attempts to do something that all the navies of the world tried to do in the 1920s and 30s--and failed. That is, they wanted to integrate aircraft carriers and submarines with the battle line, because, in the minds of most admirals, the battleship was still the apex of naval power. The problem were manifold. Aircraft carriers were seen mainly as an extension of the scouting force, and could support the battle line in the run-up to the main engagement or the pursuit afterwards. But carriers were eggshells armed with sledgehammers, and if you kept them with the battle force, inevitably they would be destroyed. And, as aircraft increase in range, speed and firepower, it was not necessary for them to be up with the battle force at all. In fact, the battle force became an adjunct to the carrier. Similarly, the "fleet submarine", pursued variously by the British, Japanese and American navies, was seen as an extension of the fleet's eyes, and a means of imposing attrition on the enemy during the approach phase of the battle. With unlimited submarine warfare supposedly outlawed by treaty, there was no other rationale for the submarine (though, as soon as the balloon went up, EVERYBODY waged unrestricted submarine warfare). So, this called for a sub capable of more than 20 knots on the surface, and with a range commensurate with that of the battle fleet. Fortunately, that also made a sub ideally suited for attacking commerce in the Pacific. Exercises to operate submarines with the battle fleet revealed the difficulties in communication, coordination, and even just positioning for a shot in the midst of a swirling battle. In World War II, the closest the fleet sub concept came to fruition was deployed submarines in a scouting screen hundreds of miles ahead of the fleet, and allowing them to maneuver freely. As should be apparent, different modes of warfare require different types of formations. Air defense and ASW work best with circular formations, putting high value targets at the center of the formation, screened by cruisers and destroyers in concentric rings. Surface warfare, on the other hand, requires linear formations--lines and columns, by which firepower can be maximized, concentration against a portion of the enemy force achieved, and command and control maintained. But, if you are deployed for a surface engagement, you are vulnerable to both submarine and air attack. As things stand now, World of Warships is both most accurate and most enjoyable at the lower tiers (V and down), precisely because they are two dimensional. If Wargames wants a 3-dimensional game, it's going to have to expand the battle space to be more than 100 nautical miles per side, so that the two teams have to go looking for each other. Then there can be a submarine component and a carrier component, both independent of the ultimate surface clash. And each team would spend a lot of time in circular formations, guarding against subs and air attacks, until those have been swept off the board, and both sides can form line of battle for a second Jutland.

[@mitchrc3]

Overbiched. Overwhined. Overcomplained. Under 50k average damage per game. Not overpowered.

[@mitchrc3]

Less than 50k average damage for Gato on NA server. Not overpowered. Overbitched.

[@skyeangelofdeath7363]

It's new. This guy is SuperUnicum. When average players learn the ship it will produce OP stats.

[@samuelhakansson6680]

What a trash game this is. I really recommend people to stop playing it.