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

More radars? Nerfed radars? L2P? Radar counters?

What's your opinion?  

142 members have voted

  1. 1. Game is under development - in what direction would you like the changes to be regarding the prevalence of radars, if any?

    • The mechanic of radars may need to be changed - lower the effectiveness by reducing time/area/X-ray ability/other
    • A new gimmick could be introduced to counter radars - radar jammer/submarines/homing missiles/other
    • The maps could be changed to limit the effectiveness of radarships or to improve the effectiveness of the ships countered by radars
    • The number of radar isn't an issue to begin with - nothing needs to be changed even if radars are increasing
    • The number of radars may be an issue, but it's only a temporary one. Nothing should be changed at the moment
    • The number of radars is an issue, but only for a set number of ships which are countered too heavily - those ships may need buffs in some areas
    • There's never an issue with any game mechanics in the game - always a L2P issue/Git gud/Adapt/other
    • The game modes/mechanics may need to be looked at if the capping becomes increasingly difficult due to radars
    • Other

147 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[UNICS]
Players
2,776 posts
11,498 battles

So, is the increasing number of radarships an issue? Are they an issue for all players? for all dds or just some? For all dd players or just some?

 

For those who always telling the whiners it's a L2P issue - you may be right, but it doesn't matter here. I'm not lobbying for changes in the game. WG is changing the game regardless of my or your thoughts, the question is how it's changing. After every patch we'll have to adapt to slight changes or new ship lines and crusade against the whiners who have a hard time adapting.

 

Just like when the smoke meta became a detrimental aspect of the game, I think radars may become too prevalent. Especially some maps are more or less blocked from capping when radar numbers are high enough. It's possible to adapt to these situations too, but is the gameplay improved by these locked up positions? I think not. What's your opinion?

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AXIS]
Players
1,089 posts
2,385 battles

I haven't played for a while due to reasons out of my control. But While I do agree that RADAR was and is necessary for the game. I have also always said that the current way it works is not the best way.

There is no risk vs reward, there is no real counter play apart from 'keep something solid in between you and all the enemies' and 'stay out of range of the radar'. While both are valid tactics, I don't think they are good for the game in general.

 

In my opinion, a good way to fix it is to have LOS count for RADAR detection.

The argument that this would be too difficult for the noob players I counter with the fact that the devs went through all the trouble of making realistic ballistic trajectories and penetration values, you think the noobs understand those? Why make 1 complex but not the other? Just like smoke detection mechanics, which are a lot more difficult to see than what you can do with RADAR (with RADAR you can at least show on the minimap the areas where it will light something up)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
28 posts
3,741 battles

I'm especially miffed by the short-sightedness of WG.
You mentioned it, but the smoke-meta/stealthfire-meta was univerally hated because you had no counterplay besides blindshots and sailing away.
They nerfed that heavily when German DD's came into the game (which suffered badly in that period, being the only ones to have that "feature") and invented the Radar to counter smoke.
They overdid radar, since it now reduces most DD's most important defence, not being seen, to uselessness.
And in a stroke of genius, they implemented a CL line that relies on island cover and rainbow arcs to evade counterfire, which again, has no real counterplay besides flanking.

WG seems to understand that being shot at without being able to strike back is bad. Then they don't undestand that seeing EVERYTHING in a rather large radius makes the game play more static, which is a problem of the game in the first place. Then they don't seem to understand the strike-back part and do it again.

And now they plan to add another gimmick to fix the gimmick. They arms-race themselves with bad design decisions.
Radar needs to change in some way to not be THAT punishing for DDs, otherwise I fear the DD will go the way of the CV, albeit not as harshly.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
642 posts
2,677 battles

I don't want yet another gimmick/consumable/whatever to counter radar. It just adds even more randomness. With WG's matchmaking, you'll probably just end up with all of the radar ships and all of the anti-radar ships on the same team :Smile_trollface:

 

I think what I'd like to see the most is that they give radar a nod to realism, by making the radar detection range proportional to the target's normal detection range. So, a big, fat BB with nominal 15 km detection range (which also means larger radar cross section) can be spotted by radar at a longer range than a DD with a 5.4 km nominal detection range. As for X-Raydar... well, I'm not fully decided yet, but I won't be sad to see it go.

 

That said, I had a rather amusing idea after I read that they'll be introducing the aim point indicator on the minimap as a standard feature: What if targets that are detected by radar (but visually obscured) only show up in the minimap and not the 3D view? People would actually have to learn to look at the minimap :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ITA]
Players
434 posts
7,533 battles

I would like to see radar ships equally distribuited by the matchmacker and limited to a maximum of 2 ships per side.

 

By doing so there would be no need to implement any change to counter a consumable that is nowadays, too powerful.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,039 posts
8,166 battles

Well, playing DD is definitely harder for beginners now. One needs experience to be aggressive and still not overcommit with radar around the caps. 

 

But at TX that is 100% how it should be. What I don't want, is noobs in F3-Shimakazes just running around as they please... 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_XII_]
Players
257 posts
2,304 battles

Yes to submarines. But not specially against radar. Just for a more divers gameplay.

 

But the best counter and most natural against are the freaking islands. And making islands impenetrable for radars isn't even a nerf for radar. The situation now is you are behind a island you get picked up by radar and you stay behind the island until the radar has run his/her time. if the island is impenetrable for radar you will get no indication that somebody is using radar so you think you're save to move. ofcourse the radar-ship will not know you are there until somebodie actually moves and play the game.

 

LOOKING BEHIND AN ISLAND SHOULD ONLY BE POSSIBLE WITH (SPOTTER-)PLANES!!! Radar should be for smoke. Spotter-plane for looking behind islands.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

i think that radar is an issue when there is too much of it in enemy team. and i think this is not temporary issue.

 

and only fix i would see working is soft capping radar ships per team. any other solution would change the balance of the game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DIKI]
Players
802 posts
295 battles

remove radars from BBs

introduce "jam radar" consumable for BBs - it jams radar and hides ships that are lighted by radar.

 

BBs have one more reason to push forward

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOATY]
Players
408 posts
7,442 battles

I rarely see 2+ radars in t9 and t10 battles. 

My problem is with 4-5 torp boats in those games. 

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Players
309 posts
5,952 battles

Playing high tier DDs that aren´t gunboats is pretty much rectal cancer nowadays.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CRU_]
Players
144 posts
5,076 battles

The meta has changed, but not necessarily in a bad way. There are in my opinion 3 phases of the game, early mid and late, the current radar meta mostly affects the early game, in that it makes capping a lot harder, really that means capping should be shifted to the mid game, it's just that a lot of DDs still think they have to force a cap early. There's nothing wrong with poking the cap early to see what happens, but you have to play a lot more defensively. This is not a bad thing, it's a different thing, and evolution.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DIKI]
Players
802 posts
295 battles
49 minutes ago, Episparh said:

I rarely see 2+ radars in t9 and t10 battles. 

My problem is with 4-5 torp boats in those games. 

you need to go to "eye doctor" :)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FDUSH]
Players
1,043 posts
6,163 battles

DDs just want to sit confortably on their smoke screen and shoot without the posibility of being shooted back. It's extremely frustrating to see such frigging thing hidding and being unable to shoot it, torp it or do anything (yes, you can do blind shoots but these are too inefective).

In fact every ship should have radar, or nerf smoke screen efectiveness.

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,776 posts
11,498 battles
19 minutes ago, Tekacko said:

Playing high tier DDs that aren´t gunboats is pretty much rectal cancer nowadays.

Some gunboats are still fine in this meta, I agree. IJN dds are imo kind of pigeonholed now, they still can cap, but at a greater disadvantage than earlier. Long range torps have to be favoured to a greater degree. Some may be able to do well in Akizuki, a gunboat I know, but given its manouverability I'd rather not play it atm. Were it just for Fletch, Gearing, YY and a couple of others, I don't think the increase of radars would be as troublesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
958 posts
4,858 battles

The key issue are ships like Worcester and minotaur which have long duration radar exceeding their surface concealment. I'm excluding the chapa from this since her radar lasts only 20 seconds, as well as the Cleveland whose ranges are on par. 

 

The problem is that, no Bauer

matter how good a dd player is, you trade your hp for simply spotting the guy and there is no way around it. While mino is limited by her AP which can be bounced of mitigated, the Worcester will deal significant damage regardless. There is no option to counter it, except for rpf torping - a desperate measure at best. 

 

I have no problem with radar numbers etc, but, same as was done to get rid of stealth firing, we should at least balance radar range with surface detection (the same is true for aa range and air spotting btw).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZWSM]
[CZWSM]
Players
220 posts
12,165 battles
3 ore fa, Episparh ha scritto:

I rarely see 2+ radars in t9 and t10 battles. 

My problem is with 4-5 torp boats in those games. 

Probably playing different game :)

 

3 ore fa, zengaze ha scritto:

The meta has changed, but not necessarily in a bad way. There are in my opinion 3 phases of the game, early mid and late, the current radar meta mostly affects the early game, in that it makes capping a lot harder, really that means capping should be shifted to the mid game, it's just that a lot of DDs still think they have to force a cap early. There's nothing wrong with poking the cap early to see what happens, but you have to play a lot more defensively. This is not a bad thing, it's a different thing, and evolution.

It is true if number of radars in both teams is proportional - but often we have situations when one side has much more radars than the second one... In that case one team is able to safely cap, control the caps and way to

victory is mostly open :). My lovely Fletcher and Harekaze are in port last weeks, I'm playng mostly Gearing, Yue and Shima - reason: long torpedos. It's only way how do "something" against camping DM/Worcester/Moskva... (etc.) from flank....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
1,333 posts
12,564 battles
2 hours ago, _Helmut_Kohl_ said:

Well, playing DD is definitely harder for beginners now. One needs experience to be aggressive and still not overcommit with radar around the caps. 

 

But at TX that is 100% how it should be. What I don't want, is noobs in F3-Shimakazes just running around as they please... 

It is harder for beginners indeed, but... Some things are pretty basic. Seems like the people that complain the most about radar that ive seen IG is the not so bright players that push a cap, gets spotted by a radar ship and the instant reaction of the DD is to smoke up and try to hide in it instead of running.

I see that everyday. Ofc after they die, they complain that radar is OP. :Smile_facepalm:

 

Maybe it just is a L2P issue. :cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZWSM]
[CZWSM]
Players
220 posts
12,165 battles
12 minutes ago, MortenTardo said:

Seems like the people that complain the most about radar that ive seen IG is the not so bright players that push a cap, gets spotted by a radar ship and the instant reaction of the DD is to smoke up and try to hide in it instead of running.

Truth in 50%... but with more than 3 long-operating USN or long-range (VNF) radars in one team is situation very difficult for all DD-players (especially if they are not equipped by long lances...). Non existing equality in radars quantity is a hard problem. I'm not whining, playing T10 DDs relativelly with success lasts weeks - but only these with long torpedos... So especially T8 DDs are in big troubles :) - maybe except Asashio, but it's a really different cup of tea... :)

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,776 posts
11,498 battles
12 minutes ago, MortenTardo said:

It is harder for beginners indeed, but... Some things are pretty basic. Seems like the people that complain the most about radar that ive seen IG is the not so bright players that push a cap, gets spotted by a radar ship and the instant reaction of the DD is to smoke up and try to hide in it instead of running.

I see that everyday. Ofc after they die, they complain that radar is OP. :Smile_facepalm:

 

Maybe it just is a L2P issue. :cap_hmm:

You can't base your assumptions on some players that aren't the brightest and because they made stupid mistakes. Was stealth-firing also a l2p-issue or just a mechanic that made the game worse? Smoke-firing was nerfed. Why? because the game suffered from the smoke meta.

 

Sometimes there are valid reasons to think over certain mechanics regardless of what 'noobs' complain about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
715 posts
10,358 battles

I think that hydro and radar should be revamped and work differently, like:

 

-both should not pass large or islands in general, at all;

-radars should only provide ship detection, while hydro does only torpedoes (if its not like this already), otherwise its one and the same with range and duration difference;

-radar time should be no longer than 30s (40s with mods) and should not exeed ships own max detection;

-a consumable may be an interesting idea, like noone could lock on a target that is in range of a radar and is spotted by it while its active (some 10-15 sec).

-surely some L2P is in question, but things do get hectic for DD and it aint a good thing for the game.

 

But knowing how WG handles such matters, they will definetly use a massive nerf hammer rather than carefully examine the issue and make a logical move to tweak it a little, thus causing more issues (stealth fire, smoke changes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,833 posts
5,124 battles
3 hours ago, Amon_ITA said:

I would like to see radar ships equally distribuited by the matchmacker

 

This.

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
605 posts
3 hours ago, veslingr said:

remove radars from BBs

introduce "jam radar" consumable for BBs - it jams radar and hides ships that are lighted by radar.

 

BBs have one more reason to push forward

Helping other players is never a reason to do anything. Other players are here to help me.

You need to understand that selfish mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CRU_]
Players
144 posts
5,076 battles

I agree about the need to match radars across teams, it is too powerful a tool for their to be an imbalance in the MM

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
90 posts
8,879 battles

I see the words "submarines" and "homing missiles " and I know the weekend isn't over yet....

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.

×