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

Suggestion:- Limit number of times/duration a ship can be radared

74 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
72 posts
6,704 battles

This week, played more than 100 high tier DD games, and all of those games had atleast 1 radar. In some games, I had 4 radars against me and in my team too sometimes. It felt so difficult to cap and deal damage to BBs because they camp. It's no fun not only to me, but to other DDs too, even of enemy. So how about a DD can get radared a total of only 5 times or for a total of 3 minutes a game irrespective of number of them. Just a suggestion. I always cared for objective and victory, never for damage. So it doesn't affect me as only issue I have is I can't cap with so many radars.

  • Bad 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
6 minutes ago, Larky2k said:

how about no

Well, your opinion doesn't matter cuz you are USN cruiser main and don't have any high tier DD experience.. Only experience you have is to wreck enemy DDs, and you have Belfast too. Speaks a lot why u don't recommend this suggestion.

 

PS- Not stat shameing, just reminding why your opinion is not useful. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1DSF]
[1DSF]
Beta Tester
1,229 posts
3,744 battles
7 minutes ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Well, your opinion doesn't matter cuz you are USN cruiser main and don't have any high tier DD experience.. Only experience you have is to wreck enemy DDs, and you have Belfast too. Speaks a lot why u don't recommend this suggestion.

 

PS- Not stat shameing, just reminding why your opinion is not useful. 

So i say your opinion also doesn't matter because you are a DD driver!

 

( You see how stupid such a statement is? Everybody has the right to give his opinion, there is no restriction, if you only want statements which say "yes you are right" then you are at the wrong place! )

 

Btw, i also think this would no good thing, every Cruiser with radar can use it only a fixed amount of times alredy, it's like smoke or speed boost at a DD, so live with it!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
18 minutes ago, Arakus said:

So i say your opinion also doesn't matter because you are a DD driver!

 

( You see how stupid such a statement is? Everybody has the right to give his opinion, there is no restriction, if you only want statements which say "yes you are right" then you are at the wrong place! )

 

Btw, i also think this would no good thing, every Cruiser with radar can use it only a fixed amount of times alredy, it's like smoke or speed boost at a DD, so live with it!

Lol, I'm a DD driver, so only my opinion is most valid. Ask those high tier competent DD drivers how frustrating it is to deal with radars. And you yourself play radar cruisers, so it's fun for you like the other dude.

 

And ok, you say as smoke is limited and should be dealt with, imagine all 3-4 DDs coordinating smokes and you have no counter. So it's no fun. Same for radar too. 4 radar ships can keep you lit the entire game which is no fun. Radar usage in a game should be reduced/fixed.

  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts

Let's see, I have 4 T10 DD's a couple of 9's and multiple 8's as well as a variety of lower tier ones, does that make me qualified to have an opinion? No you can't verify it, my stats have been hidden for ages as I despise the whole stats waving thing.

 

No it's a silly idea, plus what about Hydro? I suspect the game uses the same coding for both and just different ranges. I find being radar illuminated a massive pain, but making a ship immune after a number of illuminations which could be gamed by a savvy DD driver turning in and out of radar (risky, but possible) is not a good idea. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
1 minute ago, BeauNidl3 said:

Let's see, I have 4 T10 DD's a couple of 9's and multiple 8's as well as a variety of lower tier ones, does that make me qualified to have an opinion?

 

No it's a silly idea, plus what about Hydro? I suspect the game uses the same coding for both and just different ranges. I find being radar illuminated a massive pain, but making a ship immune after a number of illuminations which could be gamed by a savvy DD driver turning in and out of radar (risky, but possible) is not a good idea. 

Hmm, yeah I consider this. So maybe a time limit till he can be radared? Like 3 minutes.. Living 3 minutes is like miracle, so he deserves not to be seen the rest game. Just an idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
1 minute ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Hmm, yeah I consider this. So maybe a time limit till he can be radared? Like 3 minutes.. Living 3 minutes is like miracle, so he deserves not to be seen the rest game. Just an idea

 

Nope, again possible to game if sat behind an island, Des Moines radar with mod is 56 seconds.

Plus there's Hydro..... As I said I suspect the detection mechanics are exactly the same in the code, just different ranges and durations, that's why they operate in exactly the same manner.

 

DD's can be very effective and destructive, the game has evolved and been balanced (for want of a better term) with Radar and Hydro being available as primarily anti DD mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
10 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

Nope, again possible to game if sat behind an island, Des Moines radar with mod is 56 seconds.

Plus there's Hydro..... As I said I suspect the detection mechanics are exactly the same in the code, just different ranges and durations, that's why they operate in exactly the same manner.

 

DD's can be very effective and destructive, the game has evolved and been balanced (for want of a better term) with Radar and Hydro being available as primarily anti DD mechanics.

Well, all the aforementioned reason speak of u being in cover which not many cap points have.. So they better remove caps if you say so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
15 minutes ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Well, all the aforementioned reason speak of u being in cover which not many cap points have.. So they better remove caps if you say so

 

Yes, upper tier maps lack cover in general, but some have usable places to sit out the radar to gain future immunity, Atlantic and Tears for a start.

Your suggestion would likely lead to DD's plain camping until radar immune, I don't see your idea as even remotely usable.

 

PLUS ----- WHAT ABOUT HYDRO? - As I've said twice now I suspect it's the same code that is used for Radar are you suggesting Hydro immunity too? Because it would have a serious impact on all cruisers, which, let's face it, are the hardest hit class in the game, one reason you see so few of them these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
1 minute ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

Yes, upper tier maps lack cover in general, but some have usable places to sit out the radar to gain future immunity, Atlantic and Tears for a start.

Your suggestion would likely lead to DD's plain camping until radar immune, I don't see your idea as even remotely usable.

 

PLUS ----- WHAT ABOUT HYDRO? - As I've said twice now I suspect it's the same code that is used for Radar are you suggesting Hydro immunity too? Because it would have a serious impact on all cruisers, which, let's face it, are the hardest hit class in the game, one reason you see so few of them these days.

Hydro means you need to get close and personal.. And detection by hydro, noone has ever survived it till full duration in any of my 5k random battles.. Out of the two, the one who hydro or the one getting hydro always die, unless in island cover.. Hydro by DD is no big deal as rushing in 1 km to smoke will auto spot them and u can kill em(exception lo yang)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts

I've survived full hydro durations in DD's...... Not easy, but it's doable.

 

If DD's became Radar immune they would ALSO be Hydro immune as it's incredibly likely it's the same code, there's no reason that the devs would code things twice when they operate the same way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
Just now, BeauNidl3 said:

I've survived full hydro durations in DD's...... Not easy, but it's doable.

 

If DD's became Radar immune they would ALSO be Hydro immune as it's incredibly likely it's the same code, there's no reason that the devs would code things twice when they operate the same way. 

Yeah, but my main problem is that hydro has some cooldown. Not the case of radar tho. With 3-4 radars every game, u will be continuously lit and can't do anything. So it needs a change. I'm not complaining radar usage with cooldown, it's OK. Not continuous tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LOBUZ]
Players
73 posts
3,711 battles

Great idea now we only need to limit number of torpedoes for DD so you can use it max 3 times and we are good. BB drivers approve.

 

The thing is that radar is only available way to detect enemy hidden in smoke or behind island. Radar as a consumable was designed when CV as class wasn't dead and ship which went closer to cap could be detected by planes. In that case ship with radar risks being detected when DD can use smoke. I guarantee that if it's random game 90% of players will focus that CA which can't change position as easy as DD do. When there is no CV in game radar is only way to spot DD players who stay 7+km away and won't let anyone spot them but can use torps again and again. There is plenty of maps where DDs can flank and stop push. If you catch them with radar they just run away before someone can hit them and if you follow to keep them spotted you get every available gun on you. So if you wan't to limit times DD can be spotted by radar limit torpedoes for DDs so they are forced to fight instead of running away.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
Just now, Xunarra said:

Great idea now we only need to limit number of torpedoes for DD so you can use it max 3 times and we are good. BB drivers approve.

Lol, didn't expect this reply from a player of your standards (top clan). So, is my reasoning really stupid? Surely 1 should be stupid here.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
5 minutes ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Yeah, but my main problem is that hydro has some cooldown. Not the case of radar tho. With 3-4 radars every game, u will be continuously lit and can't do anything. So it needs a change. I'm not complaining radar usage with cooldown, it's OK. Not continuous tho.

 

About the only scenario with constant coordinated radar usage is in Clan Battles, in randoms the chances of multiple radar ships coordinating their usage in one area are close to nil.

 

Sorry I'm totally unconvinced there's any merit to your idea and I play DD's a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
Just now, BeauNidl3 said:

 

About the only scenario with constant coordinated radar usage is in Clan Battles, in randoms the chances of multiple radar ships coordinating their usage in one area are close to nil.

 

Sorry I'm totally unconvinced there's any merit to your idea and I play DD's a lot.

Well, I have this deal recently cuz past 1 week, enemy had so many radars and it's problematic. It wasn't the case a while back, but good luck capping with 4 radars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
2,251 posts
7,328 battles

Radar is ok. It would be too easy without them.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
Just now, Kenliero said:

Radar is ok. It would be too easy without them.

Yeah radar is ok, but getting radared every time you enter a cap is not OK. 4 radars per side is no joke. 1-2 radars is OK as like in past. Just recently having this matchmaking and is no fun imo. No capping, no damage.. Why even play DDs then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,773 posts
15,233 battles

I think the best option is to limit radar ships per side to ex. 2-3 in MM. 4 is already an overkill. In such games capping is almost impossible and DD can't do nothing until number of radar ships is reduced.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
On 4/15/2018 at 6:12 AM, Odo_Toothless said:

I think the best option is to limit radar ships per side to ex. 2-3 in MM. 4 is already an overkill.

Yeah, agree. Even 3 is good. There's a 1 min cooldown between each radar, so I can cap. But 4? WG pls balance!!

 

On 4/15/2018 at 5:15 AM, Xunarra said:

Great idea now we only need to limit number of torpedoes for DD so you can use it max 3 times and we are good. BB drivers approve.

 

The thing is that radar is only available way to detect enemy hidden in smoke or behind island. Radar as a consumable was designed when CV as class wasn't dead and ship which went closer to cap could be detected by planes. In that case ship with radar risks being detected when DD can use smoke. I guarantee that if it's random game 90% of players will focus that CA which can't change position as easy as DD do. When there is no CV in game radar is only way to spot DD players who stay 7+km away and won't let anyone spot them but can use torps again and again. There is plenty of maps where DDs can flank and stop push. If you catch them with radar they just run away before someone can hit them and if you follow to keep them spotted you get every available gun on you. So if you wan't to limit times DD can be spotted by radar limit torpedoes for DDs so they are forced to fight instead of running away.

Hey man, I'm not complaining of radar.. I'm complaining of 4 radars. I can live a des memes 56 sec radar, but not 56+56+36+36( 2* des memes + Moskva + Missouri). Noone can, I guarantee you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1DSF]
[1DSF]
Beta Tester
1,229 posts
3,744 battles
6 hours ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Yeah, agree. Even 3 is good. There's a 1 min cooldown between each radar, so I can cap. But 4? WG pls balance!!

It's much more than 1 minute!

Also, nobody force you to go cap when there are some enemy radar cruisers around, maybe wait until your other team had did their job, or simply drive to another cap!

Radar is good against early capping, forcing DD drivers to use their brain instead of "i rush the cap"!

 

Also 56 sec is only on des moines with the special module, not everybody have it, and even whith the captain skill and gold consumable a cruiser can only use it a couple of times, so you won't be radared all time.

 

Btw, i also play DD, i have the Gearing, Shimakaze and the Z-52.

If you are radared you have a problem and will take some damage, so its wise to stay at the range limit of the radar to avoid or leave it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
6,704 battles
Just now, Arakus said:

It's much more than 1 minute!

Also, nobody force you to go cap when there are some enemy radar cruisers around, maybe wait until your other team had doind their job, or simply drive to another cap!

Radar is good against early capping, forcing DD drivers to use their brain instead of "i rush the cap"!

You can cap with 1-2 radars at any time. But 3-4 radars, noone can help you. U can't cap in that game no matter what. If i wait till everyone is killed, the game is basically over either in loss or with no damage at all

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
18 minutes ago, Jaki_AJK said:

Yeah, agree. Even 3 is good. There's a 1 min cooldown between each radar, so I can cap. But 4? WG pls balance!!

 

There's an issue with that, even though I'd personally like it as I'm sure would everyone irrespective of the ships they're playing.

 

Yueyang and Chung Mu can carry radar, they often don't, but I've seen it.

RN Cruisers Edinburgh onwards can carry radar, but often don't, far from unknown though.

Chapayev A hull, no Radar

New Orleans A hull, no radar (I think, not sure).

 

How do you go about balancing that? I suspect that the MM has no functionality to check on consumables mounted so it's not just a tweak to which ships can go on which sides. Plus of course there's divisions which can have 3 radar capable ships, how does the MM cope with that? There's a max wait time and a load of potential whining if people have to wait to get a balanced MM.

 

Not so trivial really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,590 battles
3 hours ago, Jaki_AJK said:

This week, played more than 100 high tier DD games, and all of those games had atleast 1 radar. In some games, I had 4 radars against me and in my team too sometimes. It felt so difficult to cap and deal damage to BBs because they camp. It's no fun not only to me, but to other DDs too, even of enemy. So how about a DD can get radared a total of only 5 times or for a total of 3 minutes a game irrespective of number of them. Just a suggestion. I always cared for objective and victory, never for damage. So it doesn't affect me as only issue I have is I can't cap with so many radars.

 

3 hours ago, Jaki_AJK said:
3 hours ago, Larky2k said:

how about no

Well, your opinion doesn't matter cuz you are USN cruiser main and don't have any high tier DD experience.. Only experience you have is to wreck enemy DDs, and you have Belfast too. Speaks a lot why u don't recommend this suggestion.

 

PS- Not stat shameing, just reminding why your opinion is not useful. 

Ok then. I have only 3 Radar-capable ships:

 - Missouri (3 matches so far)

 - Chung Mu (never used Radar in this one)

 - Yueyang (played exactly one match so far, used Radar)

 

On the other hand, I have

1287 Random matches in Akizuki

378 Random matches in Shimakaze

162 Random matches in Yugumo

95 Random matches in Grozovoi

74 Random matches in Chung Mu

plus a couple others that also can meet Radar

 

Overall DDs account for 67% of my 7 493 Random matches, giving me only slightly less DD matches than you have matches overall. Is that, for you, enough experience of being on the receiving end of Radar? I certainly hope so. So, being done with my credentials, let me give you a solid piece of feedback about your idea:

 

how about no

 

Or, to elaborate a bit: if I were to compile a list of most ridiculous propositions given on this Forum (seriously, not as an obvious joke), yours would be guaranteed a place in top 10 EVER and probably uncontested for #1 this month. You see, I get that it's not fun to face multiple Radars. There are plenty ways of nerfing Radars that I could support or, at the very least, take somewhat seriously. Propositions like

 - make it so that Radars ignore concealment and smoke but not islands (I'd like that, Radaring through landmasses is a stupid mechanic imo)

 - straight-up nerf duration and/or number of charges and/or cooldown (standard ways of balancing consumables if they're deemed too powerful)

 - impose MM rules that limit the possible number of Radar ships per team (like, say, BBs and DDs are soft-capped at 5)

 - even, what the hell: remove Radar consuable entirely! (would overturn the current meta, bring forth a huge smokefest and require tremendous amount of balancing job on current Radar cruisers but at least it's not insane on principle)

 

Your proposition isn't like any of the above, however. Even the last one (remove Radar) is more sensible. You see, what you suggest introduces a completely new mechanic where Radar can just randomly (from the point of view of the cruiser) not work. A DD disappears in smoke, cruiser fires Radar and... tough luck, nothing happens, the DD got Radared too much and now is immune. Or worse: a cruiser sails around a corner of an island. The cruiser uses Radar preemptively, it picks up nothing - but behold, there IS a ship laying in wait in an ambush, after all, safe in knowledge that Radars don't work on her anymore!

 

You see, it's one thing to introduce limitations on a consumable - but these limitations need to be consistent, known to the user and have predictable effects. Passive Radar-immunity on the receiving side creates a very unhealthy and extremely frustrating situation where consumables can't be relied on to do their job - especially since there's no way for the cruiser captain to know if invisible ships were previously Radared, how many times and for how long. Concluding: your proposal isn't even bad from the balancing perspective - since it doesn't even get to that point where balance is concerned. It's a TERRIBLE idea on a much earlier step: the one where you decide if such a mechanic is acceptable in a game in the first place. It's not bad balance - it's bad game design. Which brings us back to the main point:

 

How about no.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×