Hugh_Ruka

Hydro is passive noise detection, so it can work around landmass of sufficient thinness since water conducts noise. The problem with radar and LoS is that different wavelengths of radar behave differently and in case of bending/reflecting, the evaluation of the return signal would give false readings. So the usual radar in use is very short wavelength to avoid these false echos. As to penetration of radar, that is a combination of wavelength and signal strength. I don't think we should complicate the game like that. It should be sufficient to be based on visual loss. Basically radar should work like this: Is object in radar range ? Is object in LoS ? DETECTED. ATM radar substitutes your view range with radar range for the detection check. view range is not limited by LoS, that's why radar and hydro see through landmass. Speaking of hydro, since it is passive noise detection, there should be a speed limit in game for a minimal speed from which hydro detects the enemy ship. That would allow you to creep out of hydro range undetected and hydroing stopped ships in smoke/behind islands would not be possible.

Just watched the video from Notset about DD armor change and I have to say WG is doing something the 1/2 arsed way again, so here a proper suggestion: Add a ceiling on every armor thickness on effective armor so you cannot exceed it no matter how angled. Basically this will simulate structural toughness of the material. Example: Shooting a paper card side on, you can split it in half with a 22lr bullet. However if you were to shoot the stack of cards the same thickness as the side on card, you'd not penetrate it with the same bullet. There's only so much force a material can withstand no matter what the angle is. That would allow for better fine tuning of AP vs HE penetration and caliber vs armor penetration.

It would be enough if radar would not go through landmass :-)

Wow, there's only one collection item in the paid containers ? what a ripoff ... Is is stated somewhere what exactly you are getting in the shop containers (I have not looked for the info, so no clue). Anyway it is cheaper to buy the twin from the shop than spend money on the containers :-)

tried the short ones for a couple of games, did not work for me ... if you torp smoked up ships, the long range ones are good as well ... and for close range fight with another DD, smoke+guns+hydro work much better than torps of any kind ...

You seem to be always constructing a scenario that only favors your own argument. Previously you stated: " A Cleveland that exposed should be a sunk Cleveland or your team is doing it wrong. " However there are teams on both sides. He provides vision for his team, they provide the firepower. There's nothing my team can do for me in that case. He can be behind an island, there can be 2 radar cruisers on the same cap (which is not so rare lately) etc. Basically the DD is always at a disadvantage. If I don't go cap, I am useless to the team. yes I can wait to cap but that can be too late sometimes ... Factor in the usual torpedo range at those tiers (10km at most) and I have to operate in radar range most of the time to be of any use .... If he fires as well and is visible, yes my teammates can kill him, however that is usually too late for me. Do remember I have an enemy DD to deal with as well in most cases. A single Cleveland one on one is not dangerous, but that you already stated. I have observed a lot of Cleveland players since the patch to learn how they behave and it's the same as me in the Atlanta, just more deadly due to longer range and heavier broadside (and better survivability).

you seem to be playing a different game then ... that's a viable tactic in standard battles .... however a DD is more or less bound to caps in domination ... so it is not so hard for the radars to find them ... also radar works through islands last time I checked, so in most cases the radar cruiser does not need to be in open water .... I do play Atlanta from time to time ...

does not matter what range the radar is when the cruiser in question has +100m detection on the radar range. you spot him and you are in his radar range, you're dead ... and with a farragut f.e. you cannot do anything to him ... cannot smoke an fire, cannot torp ... also it is the longest duration ... I can happily outlast a Donskoi radar in my TRB built Shira, however Cleveland is deadly most of the time as he can lob islands much better than Donskoi. If there are 1-2 radars per side, that's ok, you learn to count the usage and watch the range .... however with 4+ radars per side, it's impossible ....

4 radar cruisers per side in T6/7/8 games ? And CV on top as well (T6/7 you sometimes still get double CV battles) ... Yeah piece of cake for any decent DD captain ...

Gun sound on the Shiratsuyu is VERY LOUD !!! It almost tore my head off when I fired the Shira guns today first time after patch. Previous games in other DDs were fine (Udaloi, Mass, Farragut). The remaining sounds were same as in other games, just the guns on the Shira (other ships guns around me were fine) were skull cracking ...

Well ... you have to ignore Wilkatis :-) Anyway I hope the situation is only temporary as with all new content (I do remember when the German DDs were introduced ... for a week you hardly saw other DDs, same with the PA ones) and it settles to the normal distribution. From that perspective it would be better if the US cruiser change was done in one patch, so the meta is disrupted once and then settles back in ...

Well ... I like the free 190k CXP and a T8 cruiser, but the game went to s..t for me as primarily a DD captain. I regularly get 4-5 radar cruisers per side + CV games. Last game in the Kagero I simply hid behind battleships in this case. No point in going into caps with 2-3 clevelands/baltimores/chapayevs covering each cap ... From that point of view, I have to say I dread 0.7.6 with the 2 new radar cruisers being introduced ... I guess I will stop playing for 2 weeks until the craze dies down ... have to remember not to buy premium when the patch hits ...

Don't really know where to post this so: Where can I get a high-res wallpaper version of this image ? I'd love to have that as desktop wallpaper ....

I've spent 7 years in EVE-O. Compared to WoWs, the servers, forums and support were close to perfection. I have spent some quality time arguing with devs directly about new features and existing issues. And I was just the common player. Their handling of the community was something I have not seen elsewhere. As to the other issues you stated, well ... Such things happened but always got resolved in public and quite satisfactory.

You are correct in A, incorrect in B. If you check any battle results screen in the Detailed report section, there are 2 times displayed: Battle duration and Time spent in battle. Obviously the 2nd is your B. The description on WG.eu page does not say anything about Time spent in battle. Just to remind you, we are talking about exiting the battle while you are still alive. And again, the description is still very much lacking a lot of details as was presented by many reports of the system not working properly (or rather applying a penalty in the wrong case). Even you are not sure as you are presenting options that don't fit existing data.

" Fleeing the battlefield is defined as being active for less than 75% of the duration of a battle (either by your own choice or in the case of technical failure). " DURATION OF THE BATTLE !!! Clearly you cannot read. I left somewhere in the middle ...

I have to say that the new system for rendering ships after detection is broken. I have witnessed on several times that a ship was rendered after it fired at least 2 volleys. That means 6--10 seconds for the ships (DDs mostly). Yesterday I was shot at by an Atlanta in open water where the ship did not render for about 3 volleys ...

I am giving up on WG. From now on I will not report any issues or bother testing on PT. Why ? BECAUSE THEY CANNOT EVEN PROPERLY EXPLAIN THE GAME MECHANICS !!! I started a game in the Leningrad on Sunday. Played for a few minutes, killed a ship, capped. Then real life intervened and I had to leave. So I exited to port and exited the client. I fully expected to be pink in the next battle. NOTHING HAPPENED !!!! WTF WG ??? From all the available information I SHOULD BE PINK !!! Can somebody explain the stupid TK/TD system to me in proper detail ? Because what was written in the forums and on WG pages is not correct.

I'll stop discussing here. You are presenting the very selfish view of "it does not affect me so it's fine". hard to argue against that ....

1. is a fiction of yours. I do that all the time and got no penalty 2. is the point of most of my comments against the system ... that one is a huge letdown

The problem is that WG does not have the manpower to properly develop the game, so asking them to oversee these incidents is much too much. Thus they implemented an automatic "presumed guilty" system with no appeal possible. Punishing "not paying attention" means punishing peoples mental capacity which they cannot do much about as well (similar like punishing color blind people). My main point is: The current system is too harsh on unintentional accidents without any oversight or appeal. It was clearly not thought out properly and unfortunately WG lacks the resources to implement a better system.

During my WoWs history I gamed on 2 laptops, one Windows 7 all intel (CPU and iGPU) one windows 10 all AMD (ryzen mobile+dgpu) both show sporadic crashes, disconnects etc ... there's quite a spread of people reporting crashed in the bug reporting threads as well ... Problem is, WG is punishing users for something that WG cannot prove they did with malicious intent. In that regard the punishment is unjustified. There has to be a some system to ensure the malicious players are punished, but so far we got 2: 1. karma based system that does absolutely nothing 2. overzealous friendly-fire and afk punishment system based on "presumed guilty" mentality One does nothing, the other does alienate innocent players and does nothing against the actual offenders ...

The problem here is that for a penalty you should have done the damage with intent to damage the team/teammate ... Friendly fire accidents where no party had the intent to do damage should not be penalized.

How about the PC is fine since these things appear and disappear with patches ? There's no software without bugs ... but building a system on the premise that all disconnects are voluntarily done by the end user is bordering on the insane ... this you wrote: " Because usually it's either guns hitting someone (a.k.a. not a oneshot) or torpedoes hitting a bigger healthier ship like a BB (a.k.a. not a oneshot) " The topic started with a DD torping another DD ... so both of your scenarios do not apply ...

2 issues observed 1. No status screen after battle: Happens when I finish a game and while in that game another one that I exited before end finishes as well (got sunk and exited to port, started a new game with other ship). I can access the battle stats via the notification window, but I get dropped straight into port after the last battle ends. 2. Multistage missions somehow get corrupted: I finished the 1st stage, then killed a ship for towards the 2nd stage goal, went to check the status: After exiting the client and logging back in, the display is correct.