Suggestion: Radar rework

[Figment]

Triggered by another topic on radar vs DD presence. Though radar is... manageable for a DD, it's not a fun mechanic for either side. It's also not very logical and it's not very distinct from hydro. Hence I came up with the following rework suggestion:

 

 

Currently radar is just a long range, short lived hydro without torpedo exposure, it works too much in the same way and it is too effective against fragile targets that rely on stealth in open waters, IMO. I don't think it's a lot of fun to play with or against as it's too close to an I-win-from-a-safe-distance button at times.

 

I would like radar reworked to be more distinguishable from hydro, more like the following:

 

Reworked radar:

• Radar ranges: 8-12km (depending on tier and nation)
• Sweeping (rotating) scan with a fade effect trailing it (sudden full exposure that dims again as the scan moves on - currently it's the other way around for some reason where it starts with a map blip and only then a visual).
• Variation in rotational speed and fade time depending on nation: slower rotation results in slower fading, but takes longer until the next radar sweep (one sweep every 15-25s
  • Time limited exposure would variate between 5-10s per exposure round. Exposed ships slowly fade to invisibility again in this time. Thus you slowly lose track of the target after initial detection. This would give the target time to change course in between detections to try and throw off those aiming at it. Obviously this benefits nimbler ships like destroyers more than BBs and cruisers, but they're also more vulnerable to getting hit upon detection and have less they can do in retaliation, so that's only fair. The first sweep would likely be more of a warning to both sides, where one side would start aiming and the detected player starts running, rather than an immediate unrelenting 30s of getting spammed by everyone in the vicinity.
• Duration: 1:30-2:30mins depending on radar sweep speed (slower is longer active)
  • Total exposure time should be similar between each type of radar, it may even be related to a ship's reload speed (say two reloads possible till the next sweep hits)
• Target exposure type depends on the size and distance to the edge of any obstructions in between the radar ship and the target. The different exposures would be:
  • Full visibility and map detection when there are no obstructions in between target and radarship
  • Shorter visual exposure time when behind low profile obstruction or within/behind standard smoke screens: -50% exposure time
  • A shortlived blip on the map only when completely out of line of sight and over 100m away from the line of sight obstruction
  • Neiher visual or map exposure when more or less hugging the line of sight obstruction, simulating dead zones where the radar is not able to differentiate between target and obstruction.
  • Note: Other ships may act like obstructions.

New counter: radar reflecting fog (alternative smoke screen)

• Give smoke screen ships a choice between high density and low density smoke screens (in the same way you can pick between hydro and fighter plane). Low density smoke screen would be like that of today. High density smoke screens would have a narrower radius, be significantly darker in tone (grey to black) to be recognisable as such, and act like a radar barrier as well as a visual barrier. This type of smoke screen shows up on the map when within active radar range, alerting players to the presence of a radar barrier.
• High density smoke screen does not impact hydro, just radar
• Visibility into dense smoke screen is reduced by 1km
• Ships within the smoke screen radius need to be 50% closer to the edge of the smoke screen in order to look out of it than from within regular smoke screens

 

The narrower smoke screen radius would impose some limitations in other situations where you'd like to fog. It would make you more vulnerable to aircraft detection and torpedo strikes because you've got less smoke to hide in, so it narrows where you might be. Narrower smoke screens also risk exposing you longer while fogging at full speed as it'll take just a little longer to get out of sight. As such there'd be a trade-off to make, but it may well be worth it in games where you can expect a lot of radar cruisers.

 

 

Meh, I just think the current radar is lazy design and not very entertaining to play with or against. I'd like to see it be more cat and mouse gameplay where the hunter has to make an effort to predict the target's next move, than the prolonged exposure that leads to the piling of everyone on the same low health target that often results from it now.

[KillStealBoss]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

it's not a fun mechanic for either side

The side that is radaring has no fun? Uhm I don't think so. Might be also Polish DD techtree as a side line from the Swedish DDs that might be radar one (probably from T8). We have the Orkan already and Smaland that are pure radar DDs and also Black but that one has nasty combination of radar + smoke. 

[Figment]

34 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

The side that is radaring has no fun? Uhm I don't think so. Might be also Polish DD techtree as a side line from the Swedish DDs that might be radar one (probably from T8). We have the Orkan already and Smaland that are pure radar DDs and also Black but that one has nasty combination of radar + smoke. 

Define fun though, I’m sure there’s some in it as there is in any win, even the easiest, but it is far from optimal.

 

Lighting up a target in this way without requiring skill and effort on your part (a little bit of basic positioning and educated guess timing aside) isn’t exactly very gratifying gameplay compared to the thrill of a hunt.

 

If you know the other side is going to get caught with no chance of an escape, it feels far less like an achievement. Sure, you’ll have some satisfaction from knowing you aided in taking out or took out yourself a relatively defenseless target, but if you didn’t engage in a duel woth the target yourself (especially if it was executed) or the engagement was really short then those aren’t the most memorable experiences. You kinda know the tool did most the work for you while you stayed in safety, which is not as gratifying as being rewarded for hard work and manually exposing that unit.

 

In that sense, whether the radar is mounted on a DD or a cruiser matter little.

The most fun I have in multiplayer games is knowing that it was my personal effort that resulted in a reward. A fair engagement where the outcome isn’t predetermined, guaranteed or biased but you made it work to your favour. One where you can get an adrenaline rush from the action and tension involved, but the opposite side has a good time as well. That is the kind of balance you want. What we got though is that stealth reliant ships, whether they are making a move or not are easily punished for playing it too aggressive (get spotted early) or neutered and forced to play it too soft, barely making an impact.

[powerverde]

Whenever im caught by a radar, its only my fault. So, let it be as it is.

[HMS_Kilinowski]

I appreciate the general effort that went into the idea and details. I fear it would overburden many players intellectually, if radar suddenly worked in such a complex manner. It's already tasking to make lots of players of radar cruiser understand they have radar and when would have been the right time to use it.

 

I play lots of DDs. I can handle radar in most cases. Just recently the sheer volume of radar (range * duration * no of radar ships) is overwhelming. With the russian cruiser line split the player base was presented with 4 new ships. Needless to say, they were curious and are trying it out. More so, The Petropavlovsk is very powerful, so it is a popular choice in CB and randoms. As a result we see lots of cruisers with radar.

Even with the stealth nerf the ability to stealth radar was not significantly changed. Stealth radar is not just the ability to radar as soon as you get spotted by a DD. The DD still has some momentum, both ships are moving towards each other. That all places the DD well within the radar range of a patient and competent CA-player. The radar will rather run out before the DD runs out of range.

Furthermore, stealth radaring is more than detection range. It includes the ability to use terrain to sneak up towards key areas. This ability is mostly independent of detection range. It is the more powerful the more area the radar covers and the longer it lasts. A russian cruiser can on some maps can cover two caps with his radar.

 

If radar is too prevalent it changes DD-play to a more cautious and less team-oriented approach. We can see it in the current CB-season, where a typical force of 2 radar cruisers can shut down an entire cap area. The CV-planes cover the cooldown periods of the radar and the DD becomes useless. As a result we see more teams who don't use DDs anymore.

 

I think a better and less drastic way to change radar would be to simply decrease the volume of radar. The 12km radar is too long range. Radar should not be usable from an all too comfortable distance. russian ships should get 11km radar. The duration should be decreased on most cruisers, including USN-CAs. The radar upgrade should compensate that by a longer duration, but should be moved to the 3rd slot. That means that effective radar would charge a price in terms of gun accuracy. You then can make the target visible, but you cannot blap it without help.

 

Another possibility would be to change speed boost on DDs more towards the Smaland-type. Like RN-DD-smoke DDs could get more charges of a shorter duration speed boost, that allows them to disengage faster from compromised positions.

 

But that all are just means to mitigate the symptoms of our failing BB community, who prefer to shoot targets they can hit rather than radar-cruisers whose 30mm side plating requires frustrating amounts of patience and timing.

[KillStealBoss]

9 hours ago, Figment said:

Define fun though, I’m sure there’s some in it as there is in any win, even the easiest, but it is far from optimal.

 

Lighting up a target in this way without requiring skill and effort on your part (a little bit of basic positioning and educated guess timing aside) isn’t exactly very gratifying gameplay compared to the thrill of a hunt.

 

If you know the other side is going to get caught with no chance of an escape, it feels far less like an achievement. Sure, you’ll have some satisfaction from knowing you aided in taking out or took out yourself a relatively defenseless target, but if you didn’t engage in a duel woth the target yourself (especially if it was executed) or the engagement was really short then those aren’t the most memorable experiences. You kinda know the tool did most the work for you while you stayed in safety, which is not as gratifying as being rewarded for hard work and manually exposing that unit.

 

In that sense, whether the radar is mounted on a DD or a cruiser matter little.

The most fun I have in multiplayer games is knowing that it was my personal effort that resulted in a reward. A fair engagement where the outcome isn’t predetermined, guaranteed or biased but you made it work to your favour. One where you can get an adrenaline rush from the action and tension involved, but the opposite side has a good time as well. That is the kind of balance you want. What we got though is that stealth reliant ships, whether they are making a move or not are easily punished for playing it too aggressive (get spotted early) or neutered and forced to play it too soft, barely making an impact.

So for you same goes for hydro DDs that have 5+km hydro range? Yes I have a satisfaction that I caught you on hydro. Especially on Siliwangi - the ship many people even don't know and have no idea it has 5.5km hydro. And I'm having fun from people ignorance, same when cv get into Hall and AA and gets rekt . Also note that radar works only 30-40 sec, hydro 90-120 sec. 

[Figment]

23 hours ago, MacArthur92 said:

So for you same goes for hydro DDs that have 5+km hydro range? Yes I have a satisfaction that I caught you on hydro. Especially on Siliwangi - the ship many people even don't know and have no idea it has 5.5km hydro. And I'm having fun from people ignorance, same when cv get into Hall and AA and gets rekt . Also note that radar works only 30-40 sec, hydro 90-120 sec. 

You like making assumptions it seems. To make such an insinuation a comparison is simply you looking for a reason to dismiss anything I say. It's not a very intelligent argument, it's a strawman and character attack. I also love that you think I haven't noticed how long hydro and radar work, when I explicitly mentioned the duration difference in the first post... But hey, why not pretend your debating opponent doesn't know something so it's easier to dismiss their points, right?

 

 

 

The difference between radar and Hydro is that you have to put yourself to some degree of front line risk. Even if you're on the other side of an island, you're still in close proximity and more vulnerable to enemy fire from a flank than radar is (since radar can be done from further back and is therefore harder to flank. A lot of radar ships also have mortar like fire, allowing them to fire over the island in safety). A hydro DD has to be in very close range and is therefore susceptible to torp and gunfire attacks, often with weaker guns. This is not a comparable situation. The usage of hydro results in a close range gun or torp fight, which is of a completely different nature in how one experiences it (more thrilling, more adrenaline enducing. For both sides).

 

 

[HaachamaShipping]

12 minutes ago, Figment said:

The difference between radar and Hydro is that you have to put yourself to some degree of front line risk. Even if you're on the other side of an island, you're still in close proximity and more vulnerable to enemy fire from a flank than radar is (since radar can be done from further back and is therefore harder to flank. A lot of radar ships also have mortar like fire, allowing them to fire over the island in safety). A hydro DD has to be in very close range and is therefore susceptible to torp and gunfire attacks, often with weaker guns. This is not a comparable situation. The usage of hydro results in a close range gun or torp fight, which is of a completely different nature in how one experiences it (more thrilling, more adrenaline enducing. For both sides).

If you think you can radar with any efficiency in randoms from behind some silly island without putting yourself in some sort of danger, then I'm not sure you understand how to play a radar ship effectively. Compared to a DD, a cruiser also has worse concealment, worse agility, a citadel, larger target size, typically no smoke, worse speed, so it isn't exactly easier for a radar cruiser to use radar efficiently as it is for a DD to use hydro. Sure, you might say you can hide behind a rock, but same can be done by a DD. Question is, who shoots what is lit up? A DD at least opens up a longer window with the hydro, most radars just go to waste. If you are in any position to shoot the target meanwhile, you also are in a position to be shot back and unlike the lulzy smoke + hydro combo, the cruisers typically at best find an island they can shoot over, which also means others can shoot them over this island. Saying there is no degree of frontline risk for effective radar usage is a joke and against the silly waste of radar from positions where the target can't even be shot in randoms is basically just a situation update that doesn't necessarily threaten good DD players.

[Figment]

On 11/10/2020 at 5:29 AM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

I appreciate the general effort that went into the idea and details. I fear it would overburden many players intellectually, if radar suddenly worked in such a complex manner. It's already tasking to make lots of players of radar cruiser understand they have radar and when would have been the right time to use it.

Cheers. Getting used to it is a short term effect. I rather not presume players are too dumb to handle it. Too lazy, maybe, but then they'll get used to and get on with it shortly after. If they don't use it now that's a problem located between their keyboard and chair, not an issue with how radar is implemented. Hydro, fogging, CVs, torps (many BB buffs against them), captain skill system, even HE and AP have changed how they were implemented since beta and people learned to cope with these as the new normal.

 

I don't see how it's that more complex though beyond that one might try to hide from it by hugging an object. I don't think that's an exceptionally hard limitation on the system and could be shown visually on the map as a black area surrounding the other end of islands to indicate potential hiding spots. For the remainder of the players, they either see a detected ship or they don't, they either see it on the map or they don't. There's not a whole lot to come to grips with IMO. A proper use of visual aids are IMO the most important here to teach players how it works. I doubt it'll take more than a week to get used to for most players and that a lot of players will shrug at the changes. High tier DD players on the other hand, will be quite happy there's a chance to get away even in open water.

On 11/10/2020 at 5:29 AM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

I play lots of DDs. I can handle radar in most cases. Just recently the sheer volume of radar (range * duration * no of radar ships) is overwhelming. With the russian cruiser line split the player base was presented with 4 new ships. Needless to say, they were curious and are trying it out. More so, The Petropavlovsk is very powerful, so it is a popular choice in CB and randoms. As a result we see lots of cruisers with radar.

Even with the stealth nerf the ability to stealth radar was not significantly changed. Stealth radar is not just the ability to radar as soon as you get spotted by a DD. The DD still has some momentum, both ships are moving towards each other. That all places the DD well within the radar range of a patient and competent CA-player. The radar will rather run out before the DD runs out of range.

Furthermore, stealth radaring is more than detection range. It includes the ability to use terrain to sneak up towards key areas. This ability is mostly independent of detection range. It is the more powerful the more area the radar covers and the longer it lasts. A russian cruiser can on some maps can cover two caps with his radar.

 

If radar is too prevalent it changes DD-play to a more cautious and less team-oriented approach. We can see it in the current CB-season, where a typical force of 2 radar cruisers can shut down an entire cap area. The CV-planes cover the cooldown periods of the radar and the DD becomes useless. As a result we see more teams who don't use DDs anymore.

Agreed, but I don't think it's just "new" popularity, a lot of players will deliberately pick radar capable ships for their superior offensive and defensive capabilities compared to hydro in long range, higher tier combat. I would expect clan wars to always have a few them for the purposes mentioned above.

 

Of course radar can be handled, I can handle CVs as is as well, but being able to cope doesn't equate to a correct or optimal implementation. Lots of games where I learned to manage playing against poorly balanced equipment and it's sadly too often cited as an argument by some to tolerate, if not demand the implementation not be changed.

On 11/10/2020 at 5:29 AM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

[1] I think a better and less drastic way to change radar would be to simply decrease the volume of radar. The 12km radar is too long range. Radar should not be usable from an all too comfortable distance. russian ships should get 11km radar. The duration should be decreased on most cruisers, including USN-CAs. The radar upgrade should compensate that by a longer duration, but should be moved to the 3rd slot. That means that effective radar would charge a price in terms of gun accuracy. You then can make the target visible, but you cannot blap it without help.

 

[2] Another possibility would be to change speed boost on DDs more towards the Smaland-type. Like RN-DD-smoke DDs could get more charges of a shorter duration speed boost, that allows them to disengage faster from compromised positions.

[1] There's three suggestions here really:

 

Range tweak

The range is a really minor tweak that won't do a whole lot to raise DD competitiveness since most DDs have 10km or less range, so they still would get caught with their pants down anywhere near these radar ships and on most maps it'd still be enough to cover most the cap zones with two ships.

Duration tweak
The much bigger effect would come from the decreased duration, which I agree would make it far less potent. I'm not sure if there should be radar upgrades, since intelligence on enemy positions is often mroe important than gun accuracy or range, so I don't see that mattering that much. In combination with the above might create some versatility in the various radar ships, but I'm not sure if there's a really well balanced way to do this. What's more important, seeing a ship longer or having more range? Longer is always going to be more important, because it trains more (reloaded) guns on a ship. Of course, shorter range allows most DDs to at least get some torps off in the meantime.

 

[2] I don't feel speed (aside from getting away out of detection range) is that relevant, it's just a matter of leading a bit further while the target often moves in a straighter line due to their turning circle increasing in size. Maneouvrability to dodge incoming fire is perhaps more important. The capacity to throw off the enemy aim completely is IMO something that could get a boost, but I don't see how you could implement a steering boost in any logical way.

On 11/10/2020 at 5:29 AM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

But that all are just means to mitigate the symptoms of our failing BB community, who prefer to shoot targets they can hit rather than radar-cruisers whose 30mm side plating requires frustrating amounts of patience and timing.

Often times they just don't have the angles to fire over islands and can't swiftly relocate to get a good angle. The biggest culprit here is IMO the aiming system WoWs implemented (hit island instead of what is behind it) when you can and would like to fire blind over an island, which is therefore a bigger balance issue, which also causes a lot of HE spam.

 

I'd love there to be a way to toggle aiming behind an island using the map even if you can't see the enemy there.

[KillStealBoss]

47 minutes ago, Figment said:

You like making assumptions it seems. To make such an insinuation a comparison is simply you looking for a reason to dismiss anything I say. It's not a very intelligent argument, it's a strawman and character attack. I also love that you think I haven't noticed how long hydro and radar work, when I explicitly mentioned the duration difference in the first post... But hey, why not pretend your debating opponent doesn't know something so it's easier to dismiss their points, right?

 

 

 

 

And who is making "assumptions" here. I just said I have fun playing hydro DDs and radar ones too. There is something called "being outplayed" with those things.  And if you get offended that easy I have nothing else to say. Not worth to talk to some ppl I guess.

[Figment]

9 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

If you think you can radar with any efficiency in randoms from behind some silly island without putting yourself in some sort of danger, then I'm not sure you understand how to play a radar ship effectively.

That's an assumption. If you warn people in advance before using it, it's relatively effective. The key thing in random battles is getting people to communicate and teamplay. Which isn't as hard as a lot of people think, but then, it requires a minimal effort of making some jokes, constantly pointing out priority targets with marks and writing down your own intended play and point out probable enemy moves so people can work with that information.

 

Sure, a lot of people fail at teamwork, but a lot more people are absolutely thrilled to cooperate. And it only takes a few coordinating to turn a random battle into a win. I honestly don't see this as a valid argument, at all. Do I have a lot of faith in humanity or players in general? No. But I know there's one or two >55% players in most matches, so it's going to work and a lot of 49%ers and less are going to follow your lead because it's easier to follow someone else's plan than having to think for yourself.

9 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Compared to a DD, a cruiser also has worse concealment, worse agility, a citadel, larger target size, typically no smoke, worse speed, so it isn't exactly easier for a radar cruiser to use radar efficiently as it is for a DD to use hydro. Sure, you might say you can hide behind a rock, but same can be done by a DD.

Concealment depends on the ship, but with approximately 10-12km detection range, you ought to be able to pick a route that allows you to get to the frontline relatively undetected at higher tiers. At least it's never an issue for me. Staying alive once detected and in the open, sure, that's an issue. Which is why people try to keep their broadside hugging an island most the time.

 

Some DDs like Friesland, French or Russian DDs for instance are quite dpendent on cover as well. But a lot of other DDs are reliant on stealth torping and spotting for others, which requires them to be exposed in the open most the time. Of course preferably with cover in the vicinity to duck behind for safety. But they can't both hydro and fire at targets from safety, because the range of hydro is too short for that. Hydro is more a tool to aim torps with for targets about to expose themselves (if they're stupid enough to not simply change speed while hydro'd).

9 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Question is, who shoots what is lit up? A DD at least opens up a longer window with the hydro, most radars just go to waste. If you are in any position to shoot the target meanwhile, you also are in a position to be shot back and unlike the lulzy smoke + hydro combo, the cruisers typically at best find an island they can shoot over, which also means others can shoot them over this island. Saying there is no degree of frontline risk for effective radar usage is a joke and against the silly waste of radar from positions where the target can't even be shot in randoms is basically just a situation update that doesn't necessarily threaten good DD players.

Using hydro to light something up IMO generates a larger chance to be fired back at. Depends on the situation though. Hydro is more dangerous if a cruiser has freedom to maneouvre without being fired upon due to the state of play at that point, as it also makes it harder for DDs to torp them. So a hydro ship following a DD into fog is better off than a radar ship, otoh, that hydro ship first has to get in close. This is very circumstantial argumentation though and I'm sure we can both find anecdotes to indicate it's powerful in the right situation.

 

Radar provides relative safety by having distance and the ability to spot open water like cap zones (whether or not for others) from much farther away without a guarantee that they can be shot back at. I never said it's a guarantee of safety and I think you're taking words out of context. A hydroing ship trying to expose say a DD in a cap zone has to expose themselves. This is not true for a radar ship at all times.

[Figment]

8 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

And who is making "assumptions" here. I just said I have fun playing hydro DDs and radar ones too. There is something called "being outplayed" with those things.  And if you get offended that easy I have nothing else to say. Not worth to talk to some ppl I guess.

No, you didn't 'just' say you have fun playing hydro and radar DDs, you linked it to what I would have said about it (implying I would have argued the opposite, which I didn't). I have a really big issue with people trying to put words in other people's mouths to "win" or dismiss arguments, whether or not they know it's what they're doing.

 

 

On 11/10/2020 at 9:34 AM, MacArthur92 said:

So for you same goes for hydro DDs that have 5+km hydro range?

^ I never said that. You're trying to put words in my mouth, the very definition of a strawman. The rest of your post is your argumentation on why I'd be "wrong". It's not just posting you enjoy something, you posted it for the purpose of proving me "wrong" and dismissing my post.

On 11/10/2020 at 9:34 AM, MacArthur92 said:

Yes I have a satisfaction that I caught you on hydro. Especially on Siliwangi - the ship many people even don't know and have no idea it has 5.5km hydro. And I'm having fun from people ignorance, same when cv get into Hall and AA and gets rekt .

^ I never said you couldn't have fun with hydro. I even explicitly said you could have some, I just stated there are better, more fun implementations for everyone involved than the current one. So why act as if I said you couldn't have fun? It's a preposterous strawman.

On 11/10/2020 at 9:34 AM, MacArthur92 said:

Also note that radar works only 30-40 sec, hydro 90-120 sec. 

^ You're implying here I didn't know that. Why else mention it? The problem I have with it is not the duration of the radar ability, it's the consistency of exposure during that duration combined with the effective range and areas, resulting in very little counter play possible once caught (aside from hugging an island asap or happening to be at the edge of the range).

[KillStealBoss]

7 minutes ago, Figment said:

No, you didn't 'just' say you have fun playing hydro and radar DDs, you linked it to what I would have said about it (implying I would have argued the opposite, which I didn't). I have a really big issue with people trying to put words in other people's mouths to "win" or dismiss arguments, whether or not they know it's what they're doing.

 

 

^ I never said that. You're trying to put words in my mouth, the very definition of a strawman. The rest of your post is your argumentation on why I'd be "wrong". It's not just posting you enjoy something, you posted it for the purpose of proving me "wrong" and dismissing my post.

^ I never said you couldn't have fun with hydro. I even explicitly said you could have some, I just stated there are better, more fun implementations for everyone involved than the current one. So why act as if I said you couldn't have fun? It's a preposterous strawman.

^ You're implying here I didn't know that. Why else mention it? The problem I have with it is not the duration of the radar ability, it's the consistency of exposure during that duration combined with the effective range and areas, resulting in very little counter play possible once caught (aside from hugging an island asap or happening to be at the edge of the range).

Whatever dude, you can type even more text next time. You said that you can't imagine someone having fun playing radar cruisers or DDs. I said that I had. End of the story. And when I said hydro works longer time I didn't mean to say that you didn't know, just to make you realise that it can be more annoying in some situations than radar for a DD with non hydro. Especially if somebody didn't know that particular DD had any hydro. 

Stop being obsessed with "winning argument" narcissus thing, I'm coming here to discuss not to win or lose argument or offend someone. To be honest I learned many things from other people on this forum which helped then in game. Here I just stated my opinion that it's not that annoying unless MM will give you 4-5 radars against you. And I told you to expect more radar ships in the future and accept the fact it's not going anywhere. 

[DasTongle]

Okay went over your purposed changes and while it is a nice idea, it is absolutely not feasable as it would just produce the same corridors now allready prevalent with CVs. Spotting would be way to strong if you have open sea or lot of open spaces, as you do on the majority of the T8-10 Maps, that would render some zones into a total no drive zone for destoryers even more than it is allready. 

So we are talking game breaking balance changes here that would [edited]up the lot of Destroyers even more to be honest i have no quarrel with 12km Radar on russian cruisers. I have a problem with some of the heavy cruisers that had stealth radar capabilities. That was just wrong. 

Especially on higher tiers this is just ridiculous. So if radar spots you through the island you are still behind said island and only need to stop there. Sure it is annoying for dd players especially with the CV Rework that pretty much negates their stealth. But this proposal would worsen a situation that really does not need that much attention as it would also affect smoke cruisers and other classes. the limited sweep idea is especially appaling because 15-25 seconds? Get like random detections every 15 seconds? 

No sorry i rather keep the system we have in place as it is in a good spot as it is. Russian ships have shorter duration and ususally not get much more then 1-2 salvos off , nevsky not included.... Anyway... time to get back to work.

[HaachamaShipping]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

That's an assumption. If you warn people in advance before using it, it's relatively effective. The key thing in random battles is getting people to communicate and teamplay. Which isn't as hard as a lot of people think, but then, it requires a minimal effort of making some jokes, constantly pointing out priority targets with marks and writing down your own intended play and point out probable enemy moves so people can work with that information.

 

Sure, a lot of people fail at teamwork, but a lot more people are absolutely thrilled to cooperate. And it only takes a few coordinating to turn a random battle into a win. I honestly don't see this as a valid argument, at all. Do I have a lot of faith in humanity or players in general? No. But I know there's one or two >55% players in most matches, so it's going to work and a lot of 49%ers and less are going to follow your lead because it's easier to follow someone else's plan than having to think for yourself.

If it works, then sure, most of the time it does not. Also doesn't help that a 6s delay on the radar means that the effective radar for allies can be as short as 9s and that the DD in that time can try get out. Typically, the value of just radaring for some random person isn't necessarily there, given it uses up a charge of a limited consumable, gives away your presence, if you are doing it from "safety" you are meanwhile being absolutely useless in every other way, it often puts you into forward positions that can be subject to a rush, it puts your radar on a CD and for the next minute or so you can be permaspotted for free and potentially torped.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Concealment depends on the ship, but with approximately 10-12km detection range, you ought to be able to pick a route that allows you to get to the frontline relatively undetected at higher tiers.

You then sit behind a rock and if the DD doesn't die, getting out from behind that rock has every chance of getting you permaspotted and shot at. You might also be useless there and overall it isn't the greatest of positions.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

At least it's never an issue for me. Staying alive once detected and in the open, sure, that's an issue. Which is why people try to keep their broadside hugging an island most the time.

I'd stay away from referring to personal anecdotes with your record in ships that carry radar. It's not a lot and it's hardly any sign that it really is working out.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Some DDs like Friesland, French or Russian DDs for instance are quite dpendent on cover as well.

If you are highly dependant on cover in a RU DD, I am not quite sure what you are doing. Together with French, it's likely the least impacted by lack of cover and presence of radar.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Using hydro to light something up IMO generates a larger chance to be fired back at. Depends on the situation though. 

No, a hydro DD can just ram an island in the cap, hydro and light everything up in the cap. Is it a good play? Likely not, given that you sit uselessly behind your rock doing preciously little. At best, you force an enemy DD to hide behind another rock. Worst case, there is no rock and you die. Either way, a good DD player should have better uses of their time than sitting behind a rock just to try deny the cap while doing nothing else. Same reasoning as with radar.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Radar provides relative safety by having distance and the ability to spot open water like cap zones (whether or not for others) from much farther away without a guarantee that they can be shot back at. I never said it's a guarantee of safety and I think you're taking words out of context. A hydroing ship trying to expose say a DD in a cap zone has to expose themselves. This is not true for a radar ship at all times.

You said:

2 hours ago, Figment said:

The difference between radar and Hydro is that you have to put yourself to some degree of front line risk. Even if you're on the other side of an island, you're still in close proximity and more vulnerable to enemy fire from a flank than radar is (since radar can be done from further back and is therefore harder to flank. A lot of radar ships also have mortar like fire, allowing them to fire over the island in safety). A hydro DD has to be in very close range and is therefore susceptible to torp and gunfire attacks, often with weaker guns. This is not a comparable situation. The usage of hydro results in a close range gun or torp fight, which is of a completely different nature in how one experiences it (more thrilling, more adrenaline enducing. For both sides).

9-12 km for a radar cruiser isn't much different from 4-6 km for a hydro DD, given the difference in ability to find cover, not get citadelled to crap, have a smoke screen to counter non-consumable spotting, etc. Also, the only radar ships with arcing ballistics are those with at most 10 km of range and pretty much all of them are not forgiving for screwups.

On 11/9/2020 at 9:30 PM, Figment said:

Meh, I just think the current radar is lazy design and not very entertaining to play with or against. I'd like to see it be more cat and mouse gameplay where the hunter has to make an effort to predict the target's next move, than the prolonged exposure that leads to the piling of everyone on the same low health target that often results from it now.

Honestly, I feel like this sentence expresses the difference in random experience between DD and cruiser players who learned how to play around and with radars and those that don't. Because after all these years, if you play a DD in a radar match, you know where to not go to not get radared for free and get killed or locked down for no gain. As a cruiser, you should over time have learned how to maximise the gain from radar and make it s a usage of radar leaves the enemy DD ship dead or crippled to have been worth it. If you however have people just throwing out consumables nilly-willy and DDs yoloing into cap zones to contest with no plan whatsoever, to then seek refuge behind the bits of cover the devs might have put there, then you can be sure it's just the utter frustration of radar and counter radar, where one side blinks first and dies.

[DFens_666]

On 11/9/2020 at 10:30 PM, Figment said:

Meh, I just think the current radar is lazy design and not very entertaining to play with or against.

 

Maybe you should play all or atleast more than 1 radar ship to make such statements. Try Radar Mino, and get first bloods on DDs in open water and tell me how boring that is. And dont complain if you get devstruck by BBs.

[KillStealBoss]

1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Maybe you should play all or atleast more than 1 radar ship to make such statements. Try Radar Mino, and get first bloods on DDs in open water and tell me how boring that is. And dont complain if you get devstruck by BBs.

I think he is referring to soviet 12km ones. Moskva gameplay can be boring I can agree with that one at least.

[Figment]

1 hour ago, MacArthur92 said:

You said that you can't imagine someone having fun playing radar cruisers or DDs.

No, I said: "It's not a fun mechanic for either side." That doesn't mean you can't have fun shooting people using the tool, it's that the only contribution to fun it has is giving you an opportunity to fire at something, but it doesn't really add fun gameplay value in and on itself. There's a difference here.

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

I think he is referring to soviet 12km ones. Moskva gameplay can be boring I can agree with that one at least.

 

Well, Moskva/Stalin gameplay would be boring even if you remove their Radar Maybe even more so

[HaachamaShipping]

7 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Well, Moskva/Stalin gameplay would be boring even if you remove their Radar Maybe even more so

Radarless Stalingrad basically is a crappy BB, given it then has worse armour, worse concealment, less repairs, less hp and just like BBs, no vision tools whatsoever (just an even more trash version of defAA). Guns reload faster and have better accuracy, but significantly worse overmatch.

[Figment]

36 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Maybe you should play all or atleast more than 1 radar ship to make such statements. Try Radar Mino, and get first bloods on DDs in open water and tell me how boring that is. And dont complain if you get devstruck by BBs.

Given Cleveland and playing against radar ships in sufficient amounts I know they're vulnerable if exposed and hit (they're also my priority target most the time due to being relatively easy kills with high impact on DD capacity), but that doesn't mean that them being vulnerable in specific situations should give them the ability to flat out ruin DD gameplay in other circumstances. By no means am I saying radar ships as is are completely OP. I'm saying they could be made more fun to play with and against.

32 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

I think he is referring to soviet 12km ones. Moskva gameplay can be boring I can agree with that one at least.

Not speaking of any specific radar ships, but the long range ones do have a bit worse impact on DD gameplay, because you are more likely to have to be within their radar range (even if they're not the ones you're targeting), where you can't get into proper striking distance at all and they are more of a problem for people attempting to cap a zone (which usualy means no cover to retreat to). Which is detrimental to the game, IMO.

 

 

 

Seeing as some people refer to my Cleveland, I havn't found the Cleveland very thrilling either. Too vulnerable to expose, lacks fog or torps for more aggressive engagements, also lacking (effective) range a lot of time. I don't quite like the arc, but it's the only thing that keeps it valid, just requires a type of gameplay that I'm not particularly fond off. But my winrate on it is currently a lot higher on it than stats suggest. I had a very, very frustrating and poor start with it (down to as low as 26-32% WR after 30 battles or so), as I was trying to play it as the old Cleveland I was used to years before: aggressively and in your face. Not a good idea after it was uptiered by two tiers.

 

I played way too aggressive and didn't really make use of neither radar nor cover to the degree one should, playing it more like the lower tier AA support ship and agile harassment (which worked great against cruisers back then) that it used to be on tier VI and was still getting used to facing the new ships and game mechanics added since I left. Note it was the first ship I played for a while after returning from a 4 year absence, so that was a bit of a double whammy on stats. I got it back up to 48% WR, but can't say I'm in love with it, cause it's boring. The old Cleve wasn't boring. :( I miss the old Cleve.

[DFens_666]

7 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Radarless Stalingrad basically is a crappy BB, given it then has worse armour, worse concealment, less repairs, less hp and just like BBs, no vision tools whatsoever (just an even more trash version of defAA). Guns reload faster and have better accuracy, but significantly worse overmatch.

 

Did you play Stalingrad lately (in randoms that is)?

I tried to get in a position to use Radar, which basicly leaves you permaspotted and focused by the entire enemy team because their hate against Stalingrad lets them ignore everything else.

Best play it like it has no Radar, maybe later on in the game you can go for it.

[HaachamaShipping]

14 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Did you play Stalingrad lately (in randoms that is)?

I tried to get in a position to use Radar, which basicly leaves you permaspotted and focused by the entire enemy team because their hate against Stalingrad lets them ignore everything else.

Best play it like it has no Radar, maybe later on in the game you can go for it.

I'm not saying that you should play it as a radar bot, but the radar still is a major part of the capabilities of the Stalingrad. Just saying, if Stalingrad has no vision tools at all, I'd feel like the ship would just not be a very good ship anymore over Petro or Moskva, as it'd really just be a tanky gun platform. And that's absolutely BB territory. 

[StraightUpYourA]

Rework radar as it supposed to work, Bleep on the screen that you cant know which vessel you can expect to see just a dot, if you are very close to an island you will not be detected. 

[KillStealBoss]

4 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Well, Moskva/Stalin gameplay would be boring even if you remove their Radar Maybe even more so

Yes. I would have zero initiative to push at all. Maybe because of that they have that radar. Otherwise people would play it like Slava.