Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
tenacious_torps

Realistic Radar

51 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[HF_30]
Players
1,373 posts

No, this is not about see-through islands...

 

 

PPI-scope.jpg

 

it's about keeping ships spotted permanently for the duration. Maybe there's a hint here.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THROW]
Players
724 posts
21,716 battles

If you want realistic radar it may not see through islands but it will be on permanently. 

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,685 posts
15,336 battles

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. :cap_popcorn:

 

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.:cap_old:

 

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.:cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,875 posts
11,568 battles

Before WG does that, they will reduce the effectivness.

 

Btw, realistic radar means permanently spotting DD (or any other ship!) on open water at 20km+

Welcome to the BB meta...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HF_30]
Players
1,373 posts

Nah, actually I don't care for realism. My point is that maybe there's another way to balance radar, that's somewhat intuitive, because people can relate what happens in game to a known real world object... whatever, it's really just something that came up on a stream tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,685 posts
15,336 battles
1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

Before WG does that, they will reduce the effectivness.

 

Btw, realistic radar means permanently spotting DD (or any other ship!) on open water at 20km+

Welcome to the BB meta...

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. :cap_old:

 

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.:cap_book:

 

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.:Smile_Default:

 

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).:Smile_great:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HF_30]
Players
1,373 posts

What the OP suggests is to make radar directional and rotating, so that not all ships are spotted at the same time or for the full duration.

 

But taking into account ship's size is also an idea I could get behind, Rahjailari.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,685 posts
15,336 battles
1 hour ago, tenacious_torps said:

What the OP suggests is to make radar directional and rotating, so that not all ships are spotted at the same time or for the full duration.

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.:cap_hmm:

 

57 minutes ago, LDPDC said:

Wait... has it been established that radar ships did overperform?

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.:cap_wander_2::Smile_ohmy::etc_red_button:

 

Oh yeah... And before @T0byJug gets me for this statement. I was only saying it was one time that happened right?.:Smile_hiding::Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HF_30]
Players
1,373 posts
1 minute ago, RAHJAILARI said:

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.:cap_hmm:

Probably less than you think though. Target-lock remains active for a bit after a ship goes dark anyway, but you'd be forced into firing your salvo quickly. Basically a team will have to communicate better to use radar effectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,685 posts
15,336 battles
8 minutes ago, tenacious_torps said:

 Basically a team will have to communicate better to use radar effectively.

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

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IRQ]
Players
2,753 posts
6,638 battles
1 hour ago, Mr_Snoww said:

If you want realistic radar it may not see through islands but it will be on permanently. 

And enemies could detect the location of the radar ship permanently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,594 posts
15,898 battles
40 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

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.:cap_hmm:

 

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 definitely confirm that any amount exceeding 2 or 3 per team is definitely excessive.:cap_wander_2::Smile_ohmy::etc_red_button:

 

Oh yeah... And before @T0byJug gets me for this statement. I was only saying it was one time that happened right?.:Smile_hiding::Smile_Default:

This happens to us all old Chap defiantly would not call you out because you said A match and not ALL matches  ..    2 extra letters can make SUCH a difference.   It may over complicate the MM. but I would not be against MM that tried to have similar numbers of radar and or indeed Gunboat/Torpedo boat DDs on a team.

 

This situation can often go well for the team AS LONG AS THES SUPPORT YOU..

 

I also had A similar match one time. Spotted and fired on by 7 ships.. Tanked well over 1,000,000 damage in a tier 7 DD... I escaped just...... and while they were all concentrating on me 4 of them died to my support that could concentrate on there targeting as they had no one shooting them

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,594 posts
15,898 battles
16 minutes ago, AnotherDuck said:

And enemies could detect the location of the radar ship permanently.

I may be wrong and I cant find documentation to back this up (Only had a quick look) Radar detection will not tell you where the radar is coming from (this would need 2 or 3 different points to triangulate a signal) it will just tell you radar is there and active and the rough direction of the radar signal (much the same as Radio location skill works). so an enemy is in There radar range.

 

Anti radar missiles for example ride the radar beam.. as in they head in the direction that the signal gets stronger...IE Closer

 

Maybe the a counter could be adding to Radio detection skill... if you have this any ship in radar range that is detected the skill will tell you the direction the radar is coming from (would make it easer to get out of range)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,685 posts
15,336 battles
1 minute ago, T0byJug said:

I may be wrong and I cant find documentation to back this up (Only had a quick look) Radar detection will not tell you where the radar is coming from (this would need 2 or 3 different points to triangulate a signal) it will just tell you radar is there and active. so an enemy is in There radar range.

 

Anti radar missiles for example ride the radar beam.. as in they head in the direction that the signal gets stronger...IE Closer

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IRQ]
Players
2,753 posts
6,638 battles
1 minute ago, T0byJug said:

I may be wrong and I cant find documentation to back this up (Only had a quick look) Radar detection will not tell you where the radar is coming from (this would need 2 or 3 different points to triangulate a signal) it will just tell you radar is there and active. so an enemy is in There radar range.

I've read it from a couple of sources from people who know more than I do. Yeah, you'd need at least two points to triangulate accurately. But it's also doable at longer distances than the radar can reliably spot, to my understanding. Any kind of active search, like radar or sonar, are easier to detect from other ships than the radar or sonar can detect other ships by themselves. And as been mentioned, they're also affected by target size (while counterdetecting is affected by ping strength).

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,875 posts
11,568 battles

DD are not small objects....

The Minekaze, one of the stealthiest and most nimble ships in game is over a 100m long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
769 posts
3,524 battles
6 minutes ago, T0byJug said:

I may be wrong and I cant find documentation to back this up (Only had a quick look) Radar detection will not tell you where the radar is coming from (this would need 2 or 3 different points to triangulate a signal) it will just tell you radar is there and active. so an enemy is in There radar range.

 

Anti radar missiles for example ride the radar beam.. as in they head in the direction that the signal gets stronger...IE Closer

 

Depending on the setup, the best you could get would be a bearing accurate to within a few degrees. You can get direction, yes, but not distance since that would require knowing how long the pulse took to reach you, which is impossible if you don't know when it was sent. So to get actual positioning you'd need two listeners offset from one another to be able to do some triangulation, but a single set could get an RPF-like direction. Should mention this is what modern ESM is capable of, I have no idea if this was done or even possible in WW2.

 

3 minutes ago, AnotherDuck said:

I've read it from a couple of sources from people who know more than I do. Yeah, you'd need at least two points to triangulate accurately. But it's also doable at longer distances than the radar can reliably spot, to my understanding. Any kind of active search, like radar or sonar, are easier to detect from other ships than the radar or sonar can detect other ships by themselves. And as been mentioned, they're also affected by target size (while counterdetecting is affected by ping strength).

 

Distance from radar to listener is half that of the distance from radar to listener and back to the radar again, so yes you can passively pick up a radar from a longer range than it might be able to detect you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,594 posts
15,898 battles
8 minutes ago, AnotherDuck said:

I've read it from a couple of sources from people who know more than I do. Yeah, you'd need at least two points to triangulate accurately. But it's also doable at longer distances than the radar can reliably spot, to my understanding. Any kind of active search, like radar or sonar, are easier to detect from other ships than the radar or sonar can detect other ships by themselves. And as been mentioned, they're also affected by target size (while counterdetecting is affected by ping strength).

Signal strength could easily be defeated though but using a stronger or weaker Radar Signal. In order to predict by strength of incoming Signal you would have to know what the strength of the Radar/Sonar pulse is at source..

 

Updated my comment you responded to.. How about changes to Radio Detection skill tell you the direction from your ship that the radar signal is emanating from. This would also help in letting you know if multiple radar ships are active. (good to know if you know 2 radar ships are out there and there and active at the same time.) you know you are safe for a while after. would also make  the radio detection skill more usefull..... (I only usually have this skill on my DDs during Clan battles. I remove it after)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
978 posts
5,904 battles
2 hours ago, Mr_Snoww said:

If you want realistic radar it may not see through islands but it will be on permanently. 

 

/thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,499 posts
18,161 battles

IRL both radar and hydro could work permanently. Also by mid war many warships had them, almost every US Navy ship have radar. Radar didn't make ships that are not visible by eye actually visible by eye. And there were different radars and not all of them had PPI scope

 

1432639247521.jpg

 

1432639568834.jpg

 

Basically realistic radar should work only in open, should give you range and direction but not make ship visible unless it is already visible, should work permanently and could be traced back to its origin, should be less effective in storms. But then again IRL destroyers were smaller then those in the game but them it would be harder to hit them. Also many other things should work different when compared with RL. So why change one thing to resemblance more with the real thing but leave others unchanged?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NSVE]
Players
156 posts
8,796 battles

I'm not a DD player by any means but I don't like the present version of radar and I'd like to suggest some possible changes.

  1. Have permanent radar that can't see through islands and is module based so can be destroyed by HE
  2. Change it from surface detection radar to gunnery fire control as a consumable, you get a sigma boast while activated (still blocked by islands)
  3. Have an option to choose different types of radar before you hit battle to introduce more variation in game play i.e. surface detection, gunnery control, AA gunnery control (agains still blocked by islands)

With a little more thought and some coding all of this can easily be done. Everyone's a winners and the game has more options to choose from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NSVE]
Players
156 posts
8,796 battles
1 minute ago, fumtu said:

IRL both radar and hydro could work permanently. Also by mid war many warships had them, almost every US Navy ship have radar. Radar didn't make ships that are not visible by eye actually visible by eye. And there were different radars and not all of them had PPI scope

 

1432639247521.jpg

 

1432639568834.jpg

 

Basically realistic radar should work only in open, should give you range and direction but not make ship visible unless it is already visible, should work permanently and could be traced back to its origin, should be less effective in storms. But then again IRL destroyers were smaller then those in the game but them it would be harder to hit them. Also many other things should work different when compared with RL. So why change one thing to resemblance more with the real thing but leave others unchanged?

If we could have a gunnery control radar then why not make DDs smaller. Would be a great challenge but also change the silly torp speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,594 posts
15,898 battles
39 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basically realistic radar should work only in open, should give you range and direction but not make ship visible unless it is already visible, should work permanently and could be traced back to its origin, should be less effective in storms. But then again IRL destroyers were smaller then those in the game but them it would be harder to hit them. Also many other things should work different when compared with RL. So why change one thing to resemblance more with the real thing but leave others unchanged?

Where do you get that from? Relative ship sizes in game are pretty much correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×