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

Surface Radar

178 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
3 hours ago, Runegrem said:

...I don't think making BBs more vulnerable is actually the best solution. And WG clearly thinks that's a bad idea since...

 

Do they?

 

Quote... semi quote from WG

 

---Battleships live too long---

 

"We didn't dislike the bug either, but if we make a change like this we want to do it properly and on purpose, stay tuned! :)"
 

WG actions: AP bombs, perhaps a new DD designed strongly around a anti-BB role, plus more to come?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
4 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

There? Where?

 

The fact is the game HAS radars, many ships are balanced around radar existing and the results to gameplay make the few cruisers remaining worth playing as at least they can contribute a bit more than being XP pinatas.

As someone that plays DD's a lot radar isn't impossible to deal with, it's inconvenient and can be fatal, but it's not game breaking, not by a long margin.

Where did I state anything with regards to the above post?

 

Just to repeat with regards to radar... " the rational for there introduction, how they were implemented, and the results to game play are fundamentally flawed...."

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
2,191 posts

AP bombs. You mean the things that destroy Cruisers far better than they do Battleships?

 

Asashio - This is a joke of a DD that I've played against and in the same team neither time did it make any impact and it was easy to close down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
3 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

AP bombs. You mean the things that destroy Cruisers far better than they do Battleships?

 

Asashio - This is a joke of a DD that I've played against and in the same team neither time did it make any impact and it was easy to close down.

Is the problem intent or implementation? Remember thier first attempt to change the BB meta?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
2,191 posts
6 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Is the problem intent or implementation?

 

The stated intent is questionable, bit of a stretch to believe it in fact, the implementation is utterly comical, just like when they couldn't make the Pan Asian DWT's only hit heavy cruisers so they made them hit them all.

 

Your post which I quoted (post number 124) is what I responded to where you said that radar should never have been in the game in the first place, but it is and many ships are balanced round its existing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
5 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

Your post which I quoted (post number 124) is what I responded to where you said that radar should never have been in the game in the first place, but it is and many ships are balanced round its existing.

This is what I said: "I would argue otherwise, as the rational for there introduction, how they were implemented, and the results to game play are fundamentally flawed.

 

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
2,191 posts
2 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

This is what I said: "I would argue otherwise, as the rational for there introduction, how they were implemented, and the results to game play are fundamentally flawed.

 

 

 

You might think that, but I disagree, plus the hononym has a completely different meaning indicating direction, you clearly have a good grasp of English judging by your posts.

That's why I asked where?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
2 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

You might think that, but I disagree, plus the hononym has a completely different meaning indicating direction, you clearly have a good grasp of English judging by your posts.

That's why I asked where?

You disagree with my opinion "the rational for there introduction, how they were implemented, and the results to game play are fundamentally flawed".

 

Ok, lets start at the start.  Radar was not in the game upon release, and at the time, cruisers were not balanced because of it.  So why was it added?  Your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
13,062 posts
18,851 battles
36 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Is the problem intent or implementation? Remember thier first attempt to change the BB meta?

 

I would just like to note that WG is fine with the implementation of USN AP bombs in their current state.

Quote

Are AP DBs working as intended for Graf Zeppelin and USN CVs? [...]

Basically, yes, they are. [...]

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/7m0lrm/wows_qa_18/drqq7ze/

 

Thus USN AP bombs are actually intended to be an anti cruiser weapon.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TS1]
Players
658 posts
8,162 battles
30 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

As someone that plays DD's a lot radar isn't impossible to deal with, it's inconvenient and can be fatal, but it's not game breaking, not by a long margin.

Yes, it's inconvenient, which makes for more passive gameplay.

 

And as far as I can tell, players are unhappy about how radar is balanced because they think it's powerful enough for MM to consider it.

 

29 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Do they?

 

Quote... semi quote from WG

 

---Battleships live too long---

 

"We didn't dislike the bug either, but if we make a change like this we want to do it properly and on purpose, stay tuned! :)"
 

WG actions: AP bombs, perhaps a new DD designed strongly around a anti-BB role, plus more to come?

Ah, so that's what they claim. I didn't really read much into that topic. Still, it took them a week or so to come up with a possible solution for that problem while the multiple-hit AP shells has been in the game for how long now? So I'm not sure I feel like giving them the benefit of the doubt unless they actually do something about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

I would just like to note that WG is fine with the implementation of USN AP bombs in their current state.

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/7m0lrm/wows_qa_18/drqq7ze/

 

Thus USN AP bombs are actually intended as an anti cruiser weapon.

Well, seems to me... WG is always fine with what they do.  Self reflection is not their strong suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
10 minutes ago, Runegrem said:

Ah, so that's what they claim. I didn't really read much into that topic. Still, it took them a week or so to come up with a possible solution for that problem while the multiple-hit AP shells has been in the game for how long now? So I'm not sure I feel like giving them the benefit of the doubt unless they actually do something about that.

I think WG does wants to do something about BB over-population, just that they refuse to actually address the issue head on; and probably with good reasons.

 

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------

28 September 2016


Q; Might not be within your ability to answer but misght as well ask.

Any plans to reduce the amount of BBs in game and improve CA/CL to make them more desirable?

 

Sub_Octavain: We would like to make cruisers more popular. This is why they get rudder mod.3 in 0.5.12. Other tweaks will be introduced later.

In our concept of ideal class distribution, BBs should have 25-30% of popularity. It works more or less, but on some realms/tiers they exceeded this limit.

We don't want global nerfs and will try to avoid them at all costs - this is why we cancelled bow plating reduction. But some smaller, more precise actions will be taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
13 hours ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

So radar seeing through Islands is okay in your opinion and is fair?

Actually yes. I used to share your thoughts for some time, then cbs were introduced. Played shima all the way to the flag last season. Radar is a necessary tool for competitive and will also teach dds to play around it. Ever since then I have gotten much more relaxed about it since, as I described above, you start taking into account when it becomes dangerous and when it just spots you, but does little else. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
94 posts
3,239 battles
On 8.3.2018 at 7:29 AM, Culiacan_Mexico said:

WGs comment "...but changing those mechanics would make the game more difficult to understand for players..." is weird.  Hardly the first time they have said something that doesn't make a lot of sense.

Uh yeah that’s a bit rude towards the player base.

Had they just stated that they intend it to work like that for balancing reasons, or technical issues, i would have been completely ok with that.

But simply assuming the players are too dumb to grasp the concept of Radar waves being blocked by a land mass is very questionable.

 

That’s not rocket science after all, and things like how armor layouts on different ships work or when exactly to use what ammo against which ship is imho far more complicated than understanding:

Island between? -> Radar no worky

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,994 posts

Just had a game in my Shimakaze and I need an answer about radar... I am sneaking up on a GK who is at 7.6km and there is a Chapayev at 12km... Only 2 ships are there yet all of a sudden the Radar detection icon shows and I am obliterated by GK... I follow others coming around and no other ship pings up... To me this is BS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
94 posts
3,239 battles
3 minutes ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

Just had a game in my Shimakaze and I need an answer about radar... I am sneaking up on a GK who is at 7.6km and there is a Chapayev at 12km... Only 2 ships are there yet all of a sudden the Radar detection icon shows and I am obliterated by GK... I follow others coming around and no other ship pings up... To me this is BS.

Radar ship hiding behind an island close enough so It can radar you, but invisible from you because behind the island.

He radars you, GK sees you and you get blapped?

Just a possibility...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SBF-]
[-SBF-]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
716 posts
13,490 battles
On 8-3-2018 at 7:22 AM, stewie533 said:

Unfortunately it can't be fixed because of engine limitations apparently. That really sucks. I completely agree with your point about it though. 

But since wg can't do anything about it, then you need to adapt. 

Check the minimap and keep checking it. 

Make sure you know which ships have radar and their ranges. Check divisions. Always have a quick way out when coughed out. 

That is the only way we can do something about it. 

Can't be that hard. Check if in radar range, then check if in line of sight from the radar ship. If both yes, spotted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
19 minutes ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

Just had a game in my Shimakaze and I need an answer about radar... I am sneaking up on a GK who is at 7.6km and there is a Chapayev at 12km... Only 2 ships are there yet all of a sudden the Radar detection icon shows and I am obliterated by GK... I follow others coming around and no other ship pings up... To me this is BS.

Chapa has about 11.7km radar range, might have gotten too close to him or have been hydroed by a z-52 or radared by a Yueyang from outside their detection range.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,994 posts

@dCK_Ad_HominemThought Chapayev was less than that at 10.5k. Okay it has to have been him... No other ships were even close just those 2 and team mates dealt with those without any other enemy ship lighting up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,022 posts
5,416 battles
5 minutes ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

@dCK_Ad_HominemThought Chapayev was less than that at 10.5k. Okay it has to have been him... No other ships were even close just those 2 and team mates dealt with those without any other enemy ship lighting up...

Russians always have 11.7

 

Us between 9.0(might be less for indy and Atlanta,  but this is my safety threshold) and 9.9ish. 

 

Going by that formula I tend to only spend minimal time within 10 or 12km respectively.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Community Contributor, Beta Tester
415 posts
21,164 battles

Personally, I dont have any thing against radar trough islands. Prox.spotting trough island on the other hand....

I dont even have anything against the amount of radars in the game, they just need to put rardarships under MM. When you get none and the enemy team gets 3, it can be really frustrating. Especially in ranked.
But overall, I dont mind them. It keeps me on my tippytoes. And I have simple rules like 10km/50sek for US radars and 12km/30sek for Russian radars. PADD radar I just generally stay away from. Dont see much of them either anyway.

Overall, I dont care that radar works trough islands. Im used to it, and WG wont change it anyways, so you better get used to it. And this game isnt exactly a simulator either..

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,844 posts
14,993 battles
1 hour ago, CLyDeThaMonKeY said:

Overall, I dont care that radar works trough islands. Im used to it, and WG wont change it anyways, so you better get used to it. And this game isnt exactly a simulator either..

Just a discussion.  WG remove functionality from tier 4 and 5 carriers, and one could say 'get use to it', but can we not discuss the logic and effect on game play?

 

As an example, I watch videos by farazelleth to get the views of an experienced player on the issue of tier 4/5 carriers game play, and his ideas what would make it better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,091 posts
2,423 battles
5 hours ago, Lieut_Gruber said:

Can't be that hard. Check if in radar range, then check if in line of sight from the radar ship. If both yes, spotted.

What I understand from programmers, is that if it looks easy to do... it isn't.

I don't know anything about game programming, so I will trust the professionals. They say it is not possible due to technical restraints, I believe them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IRQ]
Players
2,930 posts
7,510 battles
1 hour ago, CLyDeThaMonKeY said:

I dont even have anything against the amount of radars in the game, they just need to put rardarships under MM.

If they need special MM, they're not balanced. That means they're in a special category, above all other cruisers. That's the opposite of balanced.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×