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

One of the best improvements to spotting mechanics proved to be a bug and is removed.

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,169 posts
11,007 battles

Some time ago I was pleasantly surprised to see a very important (and good) change to spotting mechanic. The spotting penalty for firing main guns (that's at a ridiculously long for smaller ship 20 seconds) was so long only if the ship affected remained within line of sight to the enemies. Breaking the line of sight meant that the enemies were losing sight of the ship and the penalty was cancelled (just like it's not applied when you fire the guns while not within anyone's line of sight). I considered it a huge improvement in some patch I missed, but alas...

Quote

Fixed an issue which immediately removed a detectability penalty applied to a ship after firing its main guns if the ship was not in the target's line of sight. In Update 0.8.0, the penalty will work for 20 seconds irrespective of whether the target enemy sees the firing ship or not.

Hey, WG. Since the game actually improved by accident, how about keeping the improvement instead of discarding it? :Smile-_tongue:

Not to mention that it's pretty common sense and quite consistent - if you fire guns from place where they don't see you, the penalty is removed. If you fire guns and then move into a place where they don't see you anymore - the penalty should be removed as well.

 

@MrConway, how about nudging someone up there that the change - even if not intended - was actually a good one?

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
1,090 posts
14,212 battles

Acctually its not logical since "spotting" (positioing to be more precise) due to ballistic tarectory analysis does not require line of sight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,169 posts
11,007 battles
3 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Acctually its not logical since "spotting" (positioing to be more precise) due to ballistic tarectory analysis does not require line of sight

Well, we're talking game mechanics that have nothing to do with reality (the arbitrary penalty equal to maximum gun range - so the further you COULD shoot the worse your detection becomes). So I wasn't bringing up any real-world positioning method, just the game logic, where if you're not immediately spotted due to penalty, the penalty is waived. But if you disappear right after, the penalty persists for 20 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
1,090 posts
14,212 battles

Yes that is also illogical and ship should simply be visible after firing for given amount of time weather it is behind a rock or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
893 posts
3,175 battles

While I agree that it's an issue worthy of discussion, I don't think we need two (let alone three...) threads on the same subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,169 posts
11,007 battles
Just now, Yedwy said:

Yes that is also illogical and ship should simply be visible after firing for given amount of time weather it is behind a rock or not

The entire spotting mechanics are unrealistic. But they are there for gameplay purposes. Your suggestion would make a lot of ships unplayable. Not to mention that it wouldn't be realistic either. Returning fire based on your idea wouldn't work like spotting in WoWs does - it would be closer to shooting into smoke with the help of a spotter plane. In fact, blind-shooting into smokes (or, less often, behind islands) like this is precisely the players utilizing the localization method you're talking about: you identify the place of origin of shells and send your shells into the general idea. But you know nothing about what the enemy is doing: just where the shells came from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
1,090 posts
14,212 battles

Yes and to be realistic you would need sort of widened "located area" for those circumstances instead of spotted but since that does not exist as a mechanic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
4,169 posts
11,007 battles
5 minutes ago, Uglesett said:

While I agree that it's an issue worthy of discussion, I don't think we need two (let alone three...) threads on the same subject.

You might be right, I somehow missed this one. Are there any other?

 

Anyway, this thread should be closed, considering that it's redundant to the older (and more robust) one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG-EU]
WG Staff
2,426 posts
2,343 battles
19 minutes ago, eliastion said:

You might be right, I somehow missed this one. Are there any other?

 

Anyway, this thread should be closed, considering that it's redundant to the older (and more robust) one.

 

Agreed, lets concentrate on the other thread.

 

closed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×