The amazing world of Belarusian physics

[callumwaw]

Having taken some time to get used to the fact that in Belarus/Cyprus radar rays go through solid mass of rock (how else would radar detect ships on the other side of an island?), I am now amazed to discover that if you get some paint and apply camouflage patterns to your submarine, it reduces how far away your sonar ping can be heard.  I wonder why this amazing physical phenomenon isn't known and used in Western navies. 

 

Wargaming, never change :) 

 

 

[pra3y]

You know what else in this game runs on Belarusian physics? Pressing a button to magically make fire and flooding disappear, how ships have infinite torpedos without having to go to port to rearm, how ships can make such tight turns, stop and accelerate near instantaneously, how guns on ships in game can straight away land shots on enemy ships  and with such accuracy too etc. Its amazing how an arcade game pulls this off. You would even think that this is some realistic simulator.

[Pametrada]

51 minutes ago, callumwaw said:

Wargaming, never change :)

 

Don't worry, they won't. No matter how much we want them to.

[FooFaFie]

Paint has always been magical in WOWs.  Or do you think painting your ship has any effect to the despersion if you fired shells in real life?

 

But I do agree about radar. It was a missed opportunity  from WG.

 

Radar far but not behind islands

Sonar close but also torps. Also not behind islands

Spotter plane behind islands

[Chips_uk]

16 minutes ago, FieFaFoo said:

Paint has always been magical in WOWs.  Or do you think painting your ship has any effect to the despersion if you fired shells in real life?

They were called dazzle patterns for a reason, though it'd appear more effective against subs than ships - that may simply be due to a lack of naval battles maybe. Dispersion in game is obviously an abstraction of a multitude of factors that affected accuracy, and the dazzle pattern is the human element of the older range finding "what is the speed/heading/orientation". Abstraction to dispersion. Seems reasonable?

[Karasu_Browarszky]

10 hours ago, pra3y said:

You know what else in this game runs on Belarusian physics? Pressing a button to magically make fire and flooding disappear, how ships have infinite torpedos without having to go to port to rearm, how ships can make such tight turns, stop and accelerate near instantaneously, how guns on ships in game can straight away land shots on enemy ships  and with such accuracy too etc. Its amazing how an arcade game pulls this off. You would even think that this is some realistic simulator.

 

Those Belarusian buttons only work intermittently, though, or so it seems. Or perhaps the firefighters and repair crew are sticklers for workers' rights when it comes to their regulatory vodka breaks.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

16 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

They were called dazzle patterns for a reason, though it'd appear more effective against subs than ships - that may simply be due to a lack of naval battles maybe. Dispersion in game is obviously an abstraction of a multitude of factors that affected accuracy, and the dazzle pattern is the human element of the older range finding "what is the speed/heading/orientation". Abstraction to dispersion. Seems reasonable?

 

Agreed, there has to be some mechanism to vary the dispersion and accuracy in the game. Overall, if things were right, the game mechanics would cover all the various 'limitations' that exist in reality, but which cannot otherwise be represented in the game.

 

I do, of course, have a super simple solution to the 'Radar vs. Islands' problem. Let's remove at least one of them completely. I don't like radar when I'm out there in my DD, but the problem with the radar is only appears to be connected with the radar, when in reality it has to do with limited spotting ability, specifically the islands blocking the radar cruisers out of your view. Removing the islands is the way to go!

[pra3y]

2 hours ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Or perhaps the firefighters and repair crew are sticklers for workers' rights when it comes to their regulatory vodka breaks.

Well that doesn't happen for russian bbs though. Simulating how it was like on a russian BB during WW2, you have a lmited amount of repair party since the russians thought that the proper way to put out a fire on a BB was to flog it with a member of the repair party. Oh and they deal with flooding by plugging a guy in the hole. If a sailor today tell you life is tough on a ship, you should tell them that they should be glad they didn't serve on a russian BB during ww2.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

13 minutes ago, pra3y said:

Well that doesn't happen for russian bbs though. Simulating how it was like on a russian BB during WW2, you have a lmited amount of repair party since the russians thought that the proper way to put out a fire on a BB was to flog it with a member of the repair party. Oh and they deal with flooding by plugging a guy in the hole. If a sailor today tell you life is tough on a ship, you should tell them that they should be glad they didn't serve on a russian BB during ww2.

 

A slight over dramatization, I think. I would assume in reality they had to deal with leaky pipes, decayed fire hoses, empty equipment lockers, rusty or missing equipment and all the other blessed joys of life under the Toolkit Banner.

[pra3y]

33 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

A slight over dramatization, I think. I would assume in reality they had to deal with leaky pipes, decayed fire hoses, empty equipment lockers, rusty or missing equipment and all the other blessed joys of life under the Toolkit Banner.

We're talking about which reality now? Earth-1218 or Belarusian physics reality 

 

If its Earth-1218 then i wonder if they even have repair parties seeing they're more or less glorified floating gun batteries and probably older than most of the sailors that served on them.

[callumwaw]

Interestingly, it would be really easy to make radar and sonar more reasonable. They [edit: =Wargaming] already have the line-of-sight mechanic (you cannot visually spot a ship behind an island), so why not use the exact same function for radar and sonar?  To me, this seems like lazy game design. 

 

As for camo increasing dispersion - yeah, the way I understand it is that dazzle camo was meant to make it harder to estimate the distance and speed of the enemy ship. So they score fewer hits on you because they're less accurate in predicting these parameters.  

 

Don't even get me started on Soviet BB turrets rotating faster than DD turrets ;-)     (and subs that clearly are nuclear-powered, if you look at the speeds they do under water ;) )

[SV_Kompresor]

4 minutes ago, callumwaw said:

Interestingly, it would be really easy to make radar and sonar more reasonable. They already have the line-of-sight mechanic (you cannot visually spot a ship behind an island), so why not use the exact same function for radar and sonar?  To me, this seems like lazy game design. 

Because it would solve one problem and replace it with another, making the entire change pointless.

[callumwaw]

What problem would it create? A bit of realism? 

[SV_Kompresor]

9 minutes ago, callumwaw said:

What problem would it create? A bit of realism? 

1. Yeah keep pretending that realism is good.
2. If you actually cared I'd tell you, but you clearly don't.

[callumwaw]

It's about laws of physics.  Do you know why surface ships cannot fight submerged and fly in this game, and why you cannot visually spot ships through islands? Because physics. 

 

And then they go and choose only to apply the exact same law of physics to some situations (visual spotting) but not others (radar, hydro). 

 

If the game is not ruined in any way by the fact you cannot visually spot through islands, it wouldn't be ruined by radar not being able magically to go through islands, too. 

 

[SV_Kompresor]

Well I'm glad that this is a game then so the laws of physics don't have to apply.

 

Quote

If the game is not ruined in any way by the fact you cannot visually spot through islands, it wouldn't be ruined by radar not being able magically to go through islands, too. 

The game isn't ruined by radar going through islands either so changing it is pointless.

[Harvin87]

Radar not working when a land mass is on its way would be a good way to balance it....

[callumwaw]

22 minutes ago, SV_Kompresor said:

The game isn't ruined by radar going through islands either so changing it is pointless

But it kind of is. 

 

18 minutes ago, Harvin87 said:

Radar not working when a land mass is on its way would be a good way to balance

My point exactly.  If radar can work through body of rock, I want a DD that can fly and drop nuclear bombs that only kill enemies :) 

[SV_Kompresor]

1 minute ago, callumwaw said:

But it kind of is. 

It's not. And I prefer being radared while safe behind an island then to not know radar is on and moving out.

[callumwaw]

14 hours ago, pra3y said:

You know what else in this game runs on Belarusian physics? Pressing a button to magically make fire and flooding disappear, how ships have infinite torpedos without having to go to port to rearm, how ships can make such tight turns, stop and accelerate near instantaneously, how guns on ships in game can straight away land shots on enemy ships  and with such accuracy too etc. Its amazing how an arcade game pulls this off. You would even think that this is some realistic simulator.

 

You're right but there's a difference between simplifying things and introducing things that defy physics.   Yes, damage con works instantly, but then it's on cooldown which is a (very) simplified way of reflecting the fact that it takes time to put out  a fire. The other way round would It would probably have to work by gradually reducing the DoT that fire does, which would be more realistic but pretty difficult to implement (and for the players to understand). 

 

So, yeah, in a nutshell it's the difference between simplifications or a metaphorical representation of something, and defying the laws of physics, when somebody actually had to have an project team meeting where they said "we have the line-of-sight mechanic implemented, let's now choose where do we decide arbitrarily not to use it" ;-) 

[callumwaw]

5 minutes ago, SV_Kompresor said:

. And I prefer being radared while safe behind an island then to not know radar is on and moving out

oh, so that's the problem :))  So now thanks to the islands that never happens, huh?  You never move out when radar is off and then somebody turns it on? 

That's the most ridiculous non-argument I've heard on this forum. 

[SV_Kompresor]

3 minutes ago, callumwaw said:

You never move out when radar is off and then somebody turns it on? 

Kind of hard to turn it on when it runs out.

 

3 minutes ago, callumwaw said:

That's the most ridiculous non-argument I've heard on this forum. 

Just read the first post of this thread to find one that's worse.

[callumwaw]

 

2 minutes ago, SV_Kompresor said:

Kind of hard to turn it on when it runs out

 

Such a  shame, you really don't understand very simple concepts like probability. Unless you spend 80% of the battle camping behind islands - then, yes, your anti-radar strategy should work perfectly well ;) 

 

Anyway, no point talking any further, you're impervious to understanding someone else's point of view. If it makes you happy to think you're right, let it be, good luck!

[SV_Kompresor]

Talk about non arguments

[callumwaw]

It's not a non argument, it's just me not giving a toss about trying to convince you, mate. I just can't be a*sed to continue this exchange. Enjoy sitting behind an island waiting to see if somebody radars you. EOT.