Countering smoke? Do you think there should be something to counter it?

[DukeH4mm3r]

This is just a thought because I've encountered a couple of games this evening in my Baltimore and I noticed something I thought was quite alarming and perhaps, not balanced: what that was, is DD's deploying a smoke screen (which I have no problem with as its good way to keep them alive) but then launching torp spread after torp spread. And what was happening (as it was occurring against both sides) is that it pushed both teams further and further away from their objectives to the edges of the maps and this was because at this tier, the torps have ranges from 15-20km which out-ranges a hell of a lot of guns! Especially those of cruisers. All the while the DD's remain unspotted, continuously launching torps. Both games ended in draws, all because no ship could counter it. And to me, with this game because one of those rock-paper-scissors games, smoke or essentially being completely hidden within it, should have some sort of counter to balance it out. 

 

Now, I'm not saying there should be something amazingly dramatic that reveals everything inside it or blow the smoke away, but my thought was something like an ability that can be used; with an appropriate cooldown, for some ships that can be used to detect or spot ships within smoke briefly. My thought, and this is just a thought and an idea (especially considering I'm playing a lot of cruisers at present) is that maybe some cruisers, namely higher tier ones maybe get some sort of radar ping they can activate. When this is activated it'll be 'ping' once every certain number of seconds, say... every 1-3 secs, for 12 seconds and it'll reveal what's in the smoke for only 1-3 seconds before they become hidden again. 

 

Now this is just an idea and is no way meant to be taken too seriously, but to me, cruisers are supposed to counter DD's and protect ships like BB's, but when enemy ships can remain hidden from view, launching torps etc from well beyond the engagement ranges for your guns, to me, that's not balanced.

 

Interested to know your thoughts on it? Have any of your encountered such a tactic used against you? Or have you used it against others? 

 

 

[m4inbrain]

I'd love to run around with a huge fan on my ship, blowing all the fog away - but in all honesty.. No. That's pretty fine - you have DDs on your own that can push enemy DDs back. 

 

That's obviously a MM issue, if you don't get DDs while the enemy does, you're screwed - but that's something that shouldn't happen in the first place.

[Captain_Edwards]

No smoke should not have a counter to blocking your vision, because there is none.

 

However some later ships do have radar, so..........smoke really doesn't make any sense in that way when you think about it.

[Battledragon]

There is a counter, but it relies on carriers thinking of someone besides themselves.  you send a fighter squadron out and have it circle over the smoke screen.  Trouble comes when destroyers use smoke screens defenseivly, they use their smoke to cover cruisers, so you can't unmask them from the air because the cruisers hiding either side of them just smash the aircraft with their aa.

[Figment]

A counter? Like... "Do not get close". "Sail around". "Use aircraft to spy over it and through openings".

 

 

Stuff like that?

 

 

If you get pushed away by long range torps, you're doing something wrong. Tbh.

[Fominator]

Common sense is a superb countermeasure against smoke (and DDs in general).

[m4inbrain]

Apart from the obvious problem that a radar ping doesn't help you at all - you can't really use your guns based on a radar ping, because you wouldn't know speed (or just gets updated in huge increments) - shooting something according to radar, .. no. I'm pretty convinced that you'd not be able to. 

[Abraa]

No, smoke is the only thing that keeps JPN DD's from beeing perma spotted with all the amount of scout planes and the influx of CV Sqads.

 

If you can counter smoke, after the ridiculous turnrate buff of BB, you may as well remove high tier DD's from the game.

[Bortasqu]

A counter? Like... "Do not get close". "Sail around". "Use aircraft to spy over it and through openings".

 

 

Stuff like that?

 

 

If you get pushed away by long range torps, you're doing something wrong. Tbh.

 

Surely enemy DD's just stay still and launch torpedoes at you, and the enemy CV & CA does nothing with the fighters in the battle. Not to mention we have things called rudder shift time, and acceleration times for BB and CAs so they can't dodge a wall of torpedoes comming at them.

[m4inbrain]

They can easily, if the torps get spotted soon enough. 

 

If your BB is the closest ship to the incoming torpedos, that's kinda your teams fault. Apart from the obvious problem that long range torps get spotted at 2km and are rather slow, there's no excuse to be hit by those other than you not being careful.

 

edit: apart from the obvious fact that the TE deems it "unbalanced" that DDs can shoot torps at longer ranges than he can engage them, but apparently deems it "fair" to do the same thing against DDs. Which already happens btw, if there are capable CV captains on the map. Smoke is the ONLY defense a DD has, and isn't even the problem. Even without smoke, they can still engage with torps long before you can see them. Like, really long. If you get pushed back by torps (which is really weird in the first place), the smoke isn't the issue, because even without smoke you would not be able to see them at that range.

[Captain_Edwards]

Apart from the obvious problem that a radar ping doesn't help you at all - you can't really use your guns based on a radar ping, because you wouldn't know speed (or just gets updated in huge increments) - shooting something according to radar, .. no. I'm pretty convinced that you'd not be able to. 

 

Um what? Yes, yes you can very easily. In point of fact warships have radar guided fire directors. Radar does not just "sweep" around in a circle, it can be focused in a direct beam to give target speed, heading, and range. And even with just a standard sweep radar you can easily judge speed, heading and range.

 

 

[Figment]

Surely enemy DD's just stay still and launch torpedoes at you, and the enemy CV & CA does nothing with the fighters in the battle. Not to mention we have things called rudder shift time, and acceleration times for BB and CAs so they can't dodge a wall of torpedoes comming at them.

 

[Battledragon]

I've said this before, but the big problem is a destroyer can pop smoke and effectivly allow 4-5 ships to focus fire an enemy warship, which has no way to defend its self as it cannot see anything, while all the ships in the smoke screen can see it.  if you're in a battleship, even 10-12km away this is usually LEATHAL, as they can kill , or at a minimum cripple you before you can withdraw, or before the smoke screen ends.  Any time I see a destroyer hit smoke on top of other enemy ships now, I run away until the smoke clears.

There is NO OTHER OPTION, if you sit there you'll just get pounded with HE, set on fire, and wrecked without being able to get a single hit on them in return.  If there are cruisers, they will kill any spotter planes immediately.

 

Smoke, should be two way,  at least make it two way to other ships, even if a destroyer gets to magically see through it's own smoke.   Letting his entire team use it to demolish the opposition while being invisible is a massive exploit.

[Figment]

I've said this before, but the big problem is a destroyer can pop smoke and effectivly allow 4-5 ships to focus fire an enemy warship, which has no way to defend its self as it cannot see anything, while all the ships in the smoke screen can see it.  if you're in a battleship, even 10-12km away this is usually LEATHAL, as they can kill , or at a minimum cripple you before you can withdraw, or before the smoke screen ends.  Any time I see a destroyer hit smoke on top of other enemy ships now, I run away until the smoke clears.

There is NO OTHER OPTION, if you sit there you'll just get pounded with HE, set on fire, and wrecked without being able to get a single hit on them in return.  If there are cruisers, they will kill any spotter planes immediately.

 

Smoke, should be two way,  at least make it two way to other ships, even if a destroyer gets to magically see through it's own smoke.   Letting his entire team use it to demolish the opposition while being invisible is a massive exploit.

 

Uhm... They generally look around it and scout you in some other way (for instance, AIRCRAFT), they can't see through it, unless they're close to the edge on your side of the smoke, at which point you could see them too, if you were closer.

 

It is already two-way.

 

Honestly, you're whining you can be fired at by enemies that used teamwork to spot you, or take a medium risk (sitting close to the edge which allows enemies to spot them too, IF they scout the smoke area by getting somewhat nearer to it).

[Abraa]

SMOKE IS TWO WAY!!

 

If you dont see an enemy and you're beeing seen, than it is because someone else spots you.

 

All thing beeing equal, if you dont see him, he doesnt see you!

[DukeH4mm3r]

Wasn't doing anything wrong. I did try to close in on them to engage them, but with two or three DD's launching spreads and the smoke covering them and the ships behind, my BB's were falling back trying to avoid them, so I did because I had no support and getting engaged by ships I couldn't see. So I fell back and chose to engage a different flank. The only way I would have been able to counter it would have been to sail within proxy spotting range which would have been suicide. Hell, if you think it's weird to fall back, I guess sailing in to BB's, CA's gun fire whilst trying to dodge wave after wave of trops is a good idea. I was happy to take only one torp in the encounter.

 

Also, I am aware that DD's do have it hard, I see it all the time from streams in watching DD's in-game and even I'll admit they need a buff and yes I do think the BB's buff to turn rates was stupid. Hell, DD's shouldn't suffer so many critical hits from someone farting on the ship. As for the sort of buff they need I have no idea what though. I only brought this up because it's something I've observed and brought it up here to see what you guys thinking... but I guess from some of the replies here that people here don't want to think neutrally or outside the box or from the point of view of other players that will end up playing the game... probably why DD's have such a poor time in the game right now. No-one can have a good discussion about it without resulting to being sarcastic or flaming, there's just no actually input! But I guess that's just the WoT's mentally...

 

 

 

 

 

[Figment]

Wasn't doing anything wrong. I did try to close in on them to engage them, but with two or three DD's launching spreads and the smoke covering them and the ships behind, my BB's were falling back trying to avoid them, so I did because I had no support and getting engaged by ships I couldn't see. So I fell back and chose to engage a different flank. The only way I would have been able to counter it would have been to sail within proxy spotting range which would have been suicide. Hell, if you think it's weird to fall back, I guess sailing in to BB's, CA's gun fire whilst trying to dodge wave after wave of trops is a good idea. I was happy to take only one torp in the encounter.

 

but I guess from some of the replies here that people here don't want to think neutrally or outside the box or from the point of view of other players that will end up playing the game... probably why DD's have such a poor time in the game right now. No-one can have a good discussion about it without resulting to being sarcastic or flaming, there's just no actually input! But I guess that's just the WoT's mentally...

 

Two things: your team should be hunting DDs together, not alone. Especially not with BBs, they should have cruisers, CVs and DDs. A BB should be largely blind to DDs with the current setup, since that's their achilles heel.

 

You translate your team's failure, which is human error and cowardice and chaos, to a nerf of the opposition. Rather than getting your team game together, you start asking for ways to make teamwork less important, to make smoke less useful than it already is (it is limited and requires the player to make good use of it), just because someone made good use of it. :/

 

Subsequently, when someone points this out, you make an ad hominem that these people are not openminded, when it is in fact you who is asking for a buff of bad teamplay. I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for bad teamplay. Whether the star player or not, if your team fails, your problem.

 

 

 

There IS ample input, it's just something you don't want to hear: it's "l2p". There doesn't need to be a discussion of changing smoke mechanics, when the thing that actually needs to change is play behaviour by the players!

 

WE ARE DISCUSSING IT, JUST NOT THE WAY YOU WANT IT. We're more openminded than you, because we actually think outside of the principle of nerfing something. We look at context and how players behave in a context, where we realise a lot of players behave badly. Which is something a lot of people don't want to see rewarded!

[m4inbrain]

 

Um what? Yes, yes you can very easily. In point of fact warships have radar guided fire directors. Radar does not just "sweep" around in a circle, it can be focused in a direct beam to give target speed, heading, and range. And even with just a standard sweep radar you can easily judge speed, heading and range.

 

 

 

 

No, you can't. The GFCS you quote have are thoroughly inaccurate. You would NOT be able to sink a destroyer with it. 

 

The Mark 4 was mounted on most ships we play with, lets have a look at those stats.

 

War Status:  Used on Mark 37 and Mark 33 directors, installed September 1941. 
Purpose:  Fire Control of 5" (12.7 cm) guns. 
Power:  N/A 
Wavelength:  40 cm 
PRF:  N/A 
Transmitter Dimensions:  6 x 6 feet (1.83 x 1.83 m) 
Tracking Range:  40,000 yards (37,000 m) on for bombers and 30,000 yards (27,000 m) for large ships. 
Range Accuracy:  40 yards (37 m) 
Bearing Accuracy:  4 mils 
Resolution:  400 yards (370 m) and 10 degrees
Notes:  Effectively, this set was two half-Mark 3 antennas stacked vertically.  Could not track low-flying aircraft.

 

This was also the system mounted on the Baltimore. You see the problem? 

 

Yes, the Iowa had a decent enough radar to be used as fire solution, but cruisers/destroyers did not. 

 

As a small indicator what was deemed "impressively effective", and keep in mind, that's a BB GFCS:

 

In a fight between the USS Washington and the IJN Battlecruiser Kirishima, the GFCS managed a whopping nine hits out of 75 (seventy-five) fired rounds. At 7,7km range(!). And that's a more advanced GFCS compared to a cruiser, on a target double the size, slower, and alot less manouverable than a destroyer.

 

Yeah. No. Radar helped to be able to tell that "somewhere over there" is an enemy, but it certainly wasn't enough to effectively engage a destroyer. Just as a small mention: the USS Washington opened fire completely undetected, so they had time to actually aim carefully. Not a single hit was received in that battle, AND the japanese ship was lit up since they used searchlights to light up the USS South Dakota. 

 

Sorry, no. Radar certainly is not the solution for an ingame problem, which isn't even a problem in the first place.

 

I did try to close in on them to engage them, but with two or three DD's launching spreads and the smoke covering them and the ships behind, my BB's were falling back trying to avoid them, so I did because I had no support and getting engaged by ships I couldn't see.

 

So feel free to explain what you think would've happened without smoke. Do you assume you're supposed to have a chance against three DDs even without smoke - because that obviously wasn't what pushed your teammates away, since even without smoke you need to get into detection range first, which would be what, 6-7km?

 

[Captain_Edwards]

Nice, but my point still stands and you prove it. You said specifically you could NOT shoot your guns based on a radar sweep. Ships in fact do so, ships did so, and were actively used to do so. You did not specify a DD, moving at high speed and weaving. Many DD players sit static on smoke, or sail in straight lines. And smoke is not just for a DD, its a AoE effect meaning any and all ships can hide in it, or use it to mask an approach.

 

So yeah, you were wrong but do keep back-peddling and adding in extra stuff that was not specified. I have first hand actually handled and operated ship based radar, have you?

[m4inbrain]

Where did i backpaddle, what?

 

 I said: you can't really use your guns based on radar pings (literally). 

 

You said: you easily can.

 

Then i gave you an example of how wrong you are, and somehow you tell me i'm backpaddling? Troll somewhere else please. My point stands. The one trying to backpaddle is you actually, since you now imply that DDs sit immovable in smoke, which i've never seen before, not even on lower tiers. The TE specifically said that he couldn't engage the DDs because of torpwaves and smoke, so the ships further behind don't play a role at all. That his teammates retreated was due to the fact that they were shot from out of/behind the smoke, and guess what: there's already a countermeasure in the game for that. Called smoke. 

 

[Captain_Edwards]

Your back-peddling again.

 

Specifically can a ship shoot using just radar as a guide?

Yes it can.

 

Did any navies ever employ a radar guided system?

USN and RN.

 

The OP specifically states countering smoke, as its blocks vision and detection. Radar can and does counter it.

 

How do you track and fire on a target using only a radar ping?

Join the dots. This gives you heading. Range is a given. Speed is determined by distance travelled in the sweep time.

 

You plug the three of those in to the fire director and fire.

 

 

If radar could not be used to track and direct fire, then it bloody well would not be on the ships now would it?

 

I have used ship based radar first hand in real life to track a targets bearing, range & speed and used that to track and plot it's course. Secondly in the "gaming world" I have used WW2 radar in a simulation game to fire torpedoes in total and complete darkness, during  rain storms with thick fog (calm seas). To do so I had to manually calculate course, speed, range and then manually work out a firing solution for my torpedoes. And in doing so also worked out where to shoot my deck gun and hit the target while still undetected on the surface. The targets were moving at 30kts + and I hit them.

 

That game is silent hunter 4 & 5. You CAN use radar to guide guns and even torpedoes, it is entirely possible and was done and is even done so today.

 

 

[m4inbrain]

Lets see..

 

Specifically can a ship shoot using just radar as a guide?

Yes it can.

 

No, not really. Or maybe i should've said "not effective", didn't expect a Joker coming from funny island trying to suggest that i meant "they can't really shoot" literally. Would you also tell me "of course they can shoot easily" if i would've said that they can't really use their guns if there's a knot in the barrel? They could've also used the guns completely without radar guide, would most likely hit exactly as much. 

 

Did any navies ever employ a radar guided system?

USN and RN.

 

Wrong. All major navies did employ radar guided FCS, USN and RN were the only ones who had blindfire capabilities. 

 

The OP specifically states countering smoke, as its blocks vision and detection. Radar can and does counter it

 

It does not. It tells you that there's an enemy, and it tells you ROUGHLY where he is, but not good enough to engage it via your guns. What's the difference to now? You know there's ships in that smoke, you just can't tell where exactly. Outcome still is the same. And about the ships behind the smoke, shooting at range: no counter needed, since already in the game. 

 

I have used ship based radar first hand in real life to track a targets bearing, range speed and used that to track a course.

 

Guess you must be pretty old then, because you clearly wouldn't state this if you were talking about modern GFCS, no? Because obviously, you wouldn't even dare to compare the resolution of modern GFCS to analog ones?

 

Your silent hunter example is interesting, yet history disagrees again. I gave you the example of what a real GFCS (one of the more advanced ones) could do in RL back in the day, and that's 12% hitrate against a huge, immobile target at less than 8km. There's not a single thing to argue there, it's documented and fact, no matter what  you did in a game. 

 

About the backpaddling: just stop. I stay in the parameters the TE gives, you add things to your liking. Starting with stationary DDs, to "engaging/detecting ships BEHIND the smoke" where the TE clearly(!) states that he wants to detect specifically the DDs in the fog. 

 

I'm stopping here since it's getting stupid now. 

 

[Captain_Edwards]

Your constantly contradicting yourself. There is no "really", you either can or you cannot. Effectiveness in RL is not analogues to effectiveness in the game. We have vastly improved weapons, and accuracy with extremely simplified physics. You gave a specific example of blind fire radar guided guns in action in the real world, yet still maintain you could not do so "really" in a game, because its "not effective" enough in your view in the real world. Yet when I stated that in real life its possible and in simulation game its entirely possible, and its pretty much the entire point of the game and quite frankly easy after a time to "eye-ball" a targets next contact point and get a rough trajectory you still maintain it cannot be done.

 

The fact that when a player uses the ability and you can see the smoke effect and know there is a DD in the area still does not mean you have "detected" it, nor have it in visual range hence it is not VISIBLE and not rendered on screen. The ship type in the smoke is not that relevant either to the point. It can be a lone DD, or it could be an entire group of DD's or any variation of the ships in the game because smoke is an area of effect ability and not a specific target based ability. You came in to this thread in the wrong mindset and wont shake it. Its not about countering a DD zig zagg-ing around, its about countering his smoke ability which does in point of fact block all vision and detection of any vessels within the smoke cloud. The OP wants to have some kind of alternative ability to DETECT the ship in the smoke, which would allow him to FIRE on the ship with a higher chance to hit it than simple unguided "blind-fire" in to smoke. Whether he hits it or not is IRRELEVANT. In this game scenario it comes down to player skill and RNG. High player skill and good RNG vastly improved the chances of striking a target, no matter what it is when within a ships weapon range

 

Now as I have said, many players DO sit still in smoke. I see it often in t6+ matches. I have played far more games than you have and at a higher tier to boot. And in the game I have also fired on and hit targets in smoke after getting partial temporary detection. If a DD travels at speed on a straight course angled off with smoke active, it will "pop" in and out of vision and therby detection. I personally can and have judged where a DD would be if it maintained its course and speed after it "popping" in and out of visual detection two or three times and fired upon it. I have hit them a number of times in doing so in similar scenarios with almost all vessels "popping" in and out of detection. Secondly when a DD is in the smoke and creating the cloud it does a "puff" smoke effect you can see visually, therby getting an extremely rough indication of where it is.

 

Just because you think its "ineffective" does not mean it cannot be done or is not done in this game. Using smoke and running away is innefective, shooting your team mates is innefective, activating repairs on a BB for 200 dmg is innefective.

Co-ordinating with your team is "effective", using mathematics to guide your shots is "effective", taking the correct skills and equipment for your ship is "effective".

 

Right this minute in the game if WG implemented just a sweep radar screen I guarantee you players would hit ships sitting in smoke and people would [edited] it was OP.

 

Example from Silent Hunter 4 of a radar only "approach" on a target. No visual detection, no acoustic detection.

 

 

From this point on its a matter of using the "[edited] o'kane" technique to fire torpedoes and hit a target manually.

 

 

You do not even need to visually see the target, just know its position at the time your weapons reach your intended striking point. In point of fact radar in that game makes it far far easier to accurately strike a target, since you can know precise range to target.

 

 

[m4inbrain]

Okay, one last time, but then i'm done.

 

Your constantly contradicting yourself. There is no "really", you either can or you cannot. Effectiveness in RL is not analogues to effectiveness in the game. We have vastly improved weapons, and accuracy with extremely simplified physics. You gave a specific example of blind fire radar guided guns in action in the real world, yet still maintain you could not do so "really" in a game, because its "not effective" enough in your view in the real world. Yet when I stated that in real life its possible and in simulation game its entirely possible, and its pretty much the entire point of the game and quite frankly easy after a time to "eye-ball" a targets next contact point and get a rough trajectory you still maintain it cannot be done.

 

Exactly. That example (as i clearly stated) was an undetected ship, surprising another visible ship that was already engaged in battle with a third ship. And yet they managed only a 12% hitrate. That's literally the best, no actually dream circumstances to engage another ship. Feel free to explain to me how that would've looked with your ship constantly switching bearing, elevation (thanks to turning, since you have to dodge the torpedos coming at you) and speed, with a less sophisticated GFCS. Small hint: only Iowas GFCS (Mark 8 afaik) could actually account for all that. Your BS of "either you can or cannot" is simply childish, you CAN jump from a bridge as well. You simply wouldn't survive, which defeats the point. Yes you can fire your guns, but the GFCS doesn't play a role - you can fire your guns completely without radar as well and have the same chance of hitting. Not a single moving ship was ever hit in fog, why you think that is? Even better, why do you think the Ship from my example earlier, the USS Washington - that ship that had dream conditions, didn't manage to get a single hit on the destroyers which were scrambling after it, which then could retreat completely safe in fog? Being a game is not really an indicator, since the argument "it's a game, you're not supposed to go there" would work as argument there as well. The only analogue one can paint is to reallife, if you want to argue "radar". Because otherwise, the answer would be simply "l2p", because that's the whole issue with the TE. 

 

The fact that when a player uses the ability and you can see the smoke effect and know there is a DD in the area still does not mean you have "detected" it, nor have it in visual range hence it is not VISIBLE and not rendered on screen. The ship type in the smoke is not that relevant either to the point. It can be a lone DD, or it could be an entire group of DD's or any variation of the ships in the game because smoke is an area of effect ability and not a specific target based ability. You came in to this thread in the wrong mindset and wont shake it. Its not about countering a DD, its about countering his smoke ability which does in point of fact block all vision and detection of anyvessels within the smoke cloud. The OP wants to have some kind of alternative ability to DETECT the ship in the smoke, which would allow him to FIRE on the ship with a higher chance to hit it than simple unguided "blind-fire" in to smoke. Whether he hits it or not is IRRELEVANT. In this game scenario it comes down to player skill and RNG. High player skill and good RNG vastly improved the chances of striking a target, no matter what it is when within a ships weapon range

 

And there's the problem. I might be in the wrong mindset - but so are you. Everything you wrote down here can be easily countered by: get your own DD to cover your team. It's a non-issue. Apart from the intellectual dishonesty, since ships in fog certainly can be detected already, the second they shoot or by CVs (and no, planes getting shot down is not an issue, since we're assuming that people are getting shot from behind the fog - which would need planes as well to spot - if only one team has planes, it's an MM issue). The only ships to be hidden and effective in smoke are DDs. Every other ship would be suicidal to get into midrange of BBs into fog, without actually seeing targets (smoke works both ways). Smokescreens are the only defense of the weakest subclass ingame, it actually is beyond my comprehension why someone would actually argue for it. He is not supposed to fire into the fog. In fact what he's supposed to do is get his own DDs to simply fire torpspreads into that fog, done. Funny that you talk about actual "skill", yet argue to remove pretty much the only skillbased ability ingame. And that's what this ability would do, since you constantly have more cruisers than DDs in a match. A DD is literally not able to engage anymore. The only problem with the whole story the TE pictured is this: his enemies worked well together and used what you called "skill", whereas his team sniffed donkeybutts and did nothing. That's literally what it comes down to.

 

Using smoke and running away is innefective

 

 

.. what? Wow. 

 

And no, obviously, only because i think it's ineffective doesn't mean it cannot be done. The fact that it would be retarded to take away the last thing DDs have, does though.

 

Right this minute in the game if WG implemented just a sweep radar screen I guarantee you players would hit ships sitting in smoke and people would [edited] it was OP.

 

Obviously, what? You give a class an ability that completely negates the ability of another one, how is that NOT op? How about DDs and CAs get a skill (since we talk game and not realism as you stated, should be fine) that prevents BBs from using their repair (not heal) after activated for as long as the smoke CD is? And to be clear, i drive cruisers mostly. How long would it take for BB drivers to come and [edited] because they watch their ships constantly burn and flood?

 

In point of fact radar in that game makes it far far easier to accurately strike a target, since you can know precise range to target.

 

If "+-40 meters" is accurate for you. While shooting at a ship that's 12m wide and 100m long. And that's already the advanced cruiser-GFCS. And, again, against a target that is not aware that it's being targeted. Btw, from the same guy that made your first video:

 

"You are right, the radar is quite an inaccurate measuring device, but even with an error of up to 2 nautical miles you can get a pretty good idea of the course of any convoy if you take enough samples, as you can see in the video."

 

And as a last sidenote: your digital dickwaving is pointless, i get into the same matches as you do. Just that i'm on the lower end of the tierspread. 

 

 

[Captain_Edwards]

Yeah your just not getting it at all. You stated you had never seen a ship park up in smoke in the game. I stated I have because I played more games and more games in higher tiers. That's not e-peen waving, its fact. You do not have a large enough sample size to state categorically it does not happen. You do not get in the same matches as I do, if you are not in the same spread. There are a lot more people who use various different tactics up the tiers, because the CBT has been running a while and they have higher tier ships than you do.

 

"They only managed a 12% hit-rate", still means they hit the target using radar and thats in a VASTLY more complex real world scenario. We have by comparison extremely simplified physics, and extremely improved accuracy because its not real, its a game. That 12% in this simplified system would increase by a fair margin. At 20+% chance to hit or above, its fair odds I would take hence I have when in the scenario I mention above with a "popping" target and hit it.

 

 

And lets be clear here, your irate because someone WHO WAS NOT ME, said in the OP they wanted a way to counter specifically SMOKE. And you spat the dummy out and launched a tirade at me when I suggested that radar was used to do so when you stated you could not possibly do it. When I said, in a GAME its far easier and even gave examples of how in a full simulation game with vastly more complex systems than this game that its indeed far easier than in the real world (because it actually happened in the real world), you still maintained "nope, cannot do it" while giving an real world example of it. That is a contradiction.

 

In short; I didnt ask for it, I merely suggested a way it could be implemented and would work from using another games example. You went on the tirade because for some reason you conflated real world with game world and me & the op

 

Its not "taking away" the DD ability, its a counter to it. Mechanics of it are a seperate issue. It could be a consumable for gold at 1 usage per, with a few seconds activation; It could be a ship specific skill, with limited usage per match, it could be a captain skill that you get at T5, hell it could be an extra officer you get with a time cap on activation.