RAHJAILARI

Almost right there (all of the above, in fact-YAY!).... I sometimes suspect that they are all secretly in league with each other just to make sure my life will conform to the standard of hideous normalcy and deplorable respectability. They do not understand my genius. It is truly a horrible thing. Besides it's CFriday Dude!!! Trolling, while counting minutes until the first pint (it's agony, really) is practically obligatory.... Not that I ever do, no Sirreee... HAVE A GOOD ONE!! CHEERS!

Yeah, So big one is the DD right?

As for myself, it depends on the ship entirely and what I plan to do with it. For example. For my usual CA build (usually those with 203mm guns) I would pick the Direction Center for Catapult Aircraft first, then Expert Marksman & Adrenaline Rush, then BFT & DE and lastly CE & AFT. But this could change if it seems that the ship would benefit more from something else. Typically I would take only 1 1-point skill though for some I have also 2, kinda depends. For most of my DD's (IJN) I have chosen 3-4 2-point skills for example: Last Stand, Torpedo Acceleration, Smokescreen Expert or Jack of All Trades (if equipping TRB) - Occasionally Expert Marksman too (for a gunboat build). But yeah, I really do not have any "Standard build", as such I will just choose the skills that I think will benefit each boat and the role I intend to use it for the best (Heavy Cruiser/AA, DD Hunter, Torpedo boat and so on).. I agree with @Shaka_D on that many 4-point skills are quite overrated. You can always get 2 2-point skills for the same price instead.

Pffth! Methusala was still in kindergarten, when I graduated college....

Aand Amen to that brother. All of this was exactly my point to begin with. Of course, Battleship-size objects can actually be spotted at pretty much at those same ranges even by naked eye - On a clear day, of course. However, as we know these ranges cannot be directly applied to this game though so the spotting ranges here have nothing to do with how things were in real life. For example a Fuso in Wows WILL be spotted at 19km (while in real life 40km would have been more probable), likewise a Destroyer of the same tier might have a detection range of 6-8km depending on ship. So those detection ranges actually correspond proportionately pretty well with those real life numbers you just mentioned.

The battle screen sure gives that impression, while playing. But that is just a rendering-thingy and does not affect the actual ship sizes.

Aaahhhah! But you DID notice that a Minekaze at 100 m is significantly smaller that a Yamato at 256 meters right`? Also the height of a ship's profile matters, lower ships are also less easily detectable by radar than the higher ones. This all means, that they have be much closer before a radar can detect them. For example, IJN "Pagoda"type superstructure in their BB's could go up to 50 meters in height, while a DD's would scarcely reach 10, this means that the bigger structure can quite obviously be seen much further away just as it could be with plain naked eye.

Just stick with me Lads, well soon sort that out and you can have the pleasure all the time...

I have a Yamato, Shima and Des Moines so prolly I'll get those missions tonight after I start playing for the weekend (weekend warrior only). Will do them just for kicks, but actually I was not really planning to mount any of those modules, as they seem to be either pointless or will just aggravate those ship's worst weaknesses (horrible turret traverse, torp tube vulnerability and traverse) by merely amplifying their most annoying playstyle option. Well in case of Shima and Yamato anyway -> Long range torps sniping / camper-BB extraordinare and well I guess being more agile for Des Moines would be fine, but since radar action time is the tradeoff and it still won't magically become a Destroyer so = MEH!

Ssooo, next patch. Add anti-radar missiles into the game?

AAAHHAAH! I can clearly see a flaw in this plan right there.

Oh OK, that is fine by me I guess, but perhaps it would be simpler to make it so it cannot see through islands? I wonder. Might also limit their usefulness overly much. Wwell, I was in a match just last week with 5 enemy radars in it against our 2 radars and 2 DD's per team. Just my luck 4 out of the 5 were at the same cap I was heading to. After several attempts at capping and dozens of harrowing close calls, I deemed it impossible, I abandoned the cap (got no support from my own team anyway so it was pointless) and went for the cap on the other side of the map, where our other DD had just been killed. Did manage to kill their Doskoi there to my immense satisfaction and survived the match (the only one in our team, who did - It was a steamroll) BUT I can confirm that any amount exceeding 2 or 3 per team is definitely excessive. Oh yeah... And before @T0byJug gets me for this statement. I was only saying it was one time that happened right?.

Actually I respectfully digress Herr Colonel. The real radar operates very much like eyeballing in principle. It will detect smaller objects (like a DD) only from a shorted distance away than a Battleship, for example. It will bounce some from the upper atmosphere so the detection range is extended beyond the horizon somewhat, but the same basic mechanics still applies and since the curvature of earth itself is not directly affected (radar cannot make the earth flat, no matter how we would wish it), smaller objects become detectable only at close ranges than the bigger ones. So in effect BB's would indeed be seen at 30km instead of 25km, for example, however a DD's could still not be detected at the same 30 Km range, but instead perhaps at around 10-15km - In game this would perhaps mean something like 8-9km instead of 6km detection range, for example. Even modern radar, though it is more powerful and can indeed detect small objects at longer ranges (like 20km) has the same basic problem. It cannot detect every object at maximum range but a lot depends on the radar's own transmitter power, object size, shape and material too. Therefore, though WW2 radars, like the American Mark 3 shipboard radar, for example, could indeed track targets up to to 40,000 yards (or 37,000 m). This was not a blanket detection range for everything but the target would have a to be a a rather large (BB perhaps) object whose signal would always pop-up first into the screen, followed by other ships in turn depending on their size, distance and the individual ship's profile height. So radar is not actually a magic wand that makes everything and anything visible at max range (it's got better but basically it still works that way even today) but also has its limitations. All that aside tho, I think what the OP really suggests is to make it so that there is some mechanism / way by which to counter radar even at closer ranges. Not being able to see through islands, for example would indeed fill that purpose. I am actually fine, if radar will still be able to spot everything at maximum range tho (I can see how it might be tricky to program it otherwise). The difference between radar and hydro could well be precisely that radar has longer overall range BUT cannot see through islands, only smoke (as it was intended to be a primarily anti-smoke device anyway) and hydro, being the very close range thingy could still see through islands, just as before. After all, at the moment there is no real difference between how radar and hydro work, this would make them somewhat different and give each a meaningful advantage which the other one does not have (radar=range, hydro=sees all).

That would be fine methinks. Because it would also extend spotting range by roughly 20% depending on ship size. So DD's would still have the stealth advantage, just 7km instead of 6. So nothing much would change. Well, except that radar would then become pretty much irrelevant as such. Unless of course they were to introduce night fighting and additional weather effects, where it could offer an advantage. But of course then, by the end of WW2 pretty much every ship (yes including the IJN) had a radar mounted on them so it would become entirely pointless.at high tiers.

Well lad, it seems clear to me that whichever you decide to take. You will end up regretting it eventually, so save yourself the horrors of heartache, agony and doubt, compromise and save up the 1,5M to get them both so you won't have to second-guess anything. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Hhehehe! That's NOTHIING Lad. I have bagged already 9, In fact I don't even have enough BB's to mount them all anymore... Perhaps if WG were to introduce a DD which has a spotting aircraft then ....

Yesh, indeed seems like time for you to get yet another Spotting Aircraft Modification... WOHOU!

Yeah, no big surprises there either after all Radar does not exactly equate Armor and most radar ships tend be a tad squishy (DM and Moskva exempted, of course). - Oh yeah and the new Kronstad and Stalingrad, but they don't reeaally count, as Cruisers either.

Well, the article says: "To obtain a legendary upgrade, you’ll have to complete a chain of combat missions in that ship. Let's take a closer look and explore the pros and cons of the new upgrades, which will occupy slot 5 or 6, depending on the specific ship." So I would assume they can probably be found under the "Combat Missions" and can only be completed with the particular ship then.... Oh yeah - And as they said... Starting tomorrow.

How dare you, good Sir!! This is just some 5 year old throwing a tantrum because he got the "wrong" present. No need to get SO nasty. That would be downright inhumane.

"Dear WG, I just played 2 games in my Hashidate. I won the first one, but then suddenly lost the other. The problem only affects my ship, the other work just fine. So why did you nerf my ship in-between the matches? - BTW I am an Awesome player."

@Cpt_wheelDude, that is the game mechanics working, as intended. Just like you noticed yourself, Battleships cannot shoot from stealth while in smoke. You can only use the smoke to get away, if in a difficult situation but the moment you fire, you will be spotted again.

Yeah, they could be kinda like a parallel BB-line in the fashion of these parallel DD and Cruiser lines alongside the regular battleship trees. For which the main distinguishing feature would be the speedboost and perhaps better turn radius (agility) to compensate for the weaker armor. This could also include some of the sk. "fast battleships" at higher tiers. I could totally see at least 2 almost full partial trees /German and British) as well and a few "paper" smaller, partial battlecruiser lines following the intended designs of ships such a Saratoga, Tosa and others.

Weeel, I guess it's about time to see her too. However something just occurred to me... WG has actually bungled the implementation of battlecruisers big time. You see, it would actually make sense to have used the speedboost consumable, as a standard for Battlecruisers only (instead of the Frenchie BB's) to differentiate them from "real" Battleships. This would have been in-line with their intended role and character too. Oh well, that was just something that came to mind, when I saw this thread. Too late now, I guess. Sigh!

Yupp, but that is level 2 hard-core Cruiser stuff already. Very difficult to pull off and always risky but occasionally quite rewarding. => STILL trying to do Cruiser stuff, but making an escape & panic maneuver plan even before entering the combat zone. Still could end in a quick disaster tho. Have been practicing that for the last 5 months or so (particularly, since Mogami's guns are so bloody short-range anyways so you have to be relatively close no matter what). It is unbelievable the number of times I have actually ended up capping with the Mogami lately instead of the very DD that I was supposed to support in the first place. But hey, whatever works right? One day I'll learn it proper.