Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

187 Valued poster

About Rocketpacman

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia
  1. Detonations need to be adjusted.

    You are absolutely right about detonations but this is not true as far as anyone has ever been able to demonstrate. The anti-det signal does give you complete immunity from detonations. No one who has claimed otherwise has ever provided proof. It's far more likely they simply ran out or forgot to equip anti-det flags and didn't realize it.

    You have 2,100 battles and don't understand how torpedoes from a "small boat" can sink a larger boat in a single volley? C'mon man make an alt before you start a thread like this. That's like trolling 101.
  3. Run their [edited]down and force them to smoke. Unless you're up against a remarkably cautious or skilled opponent they are almost always sailing towards you and cannot turn away in time to maintain their concealment advantage. Or these are T8+ DDs were talking about in which case you're just up against the unavoidable stealth gap and shouldn't really be trying to cap without a stealthier DD ahead of you right off the bat in a Mahan anyway.
  4. Infinite fire meta has to stop

    Safe positioning isn't necessarily the same thing as good positioning. Keeping your BB safe in spawn while the battle for the objectives is lost because you're too far away to effectively deter enemy cruisers and BBs from pushing in is not good positioning. But yes confusing the two is why so many BBs camp. Positioning properly is hard and BBs have long range so it's easy for them to just sail back in the spawn where they don't have to worry about much and can still get hits (sometimes big hits) on people. They also have a tendency to vacuum up a lot of worthless but impressive looking damage in the terminal stages of the game when the enemy team is just rushing into them to farm as much damage as they can before their inevitable victory.
  5. Infinite fire meta has to stop

    As a person who has been focused to death and burned down many times in battleships it was almost always my fault for poor positioning.
  6. Detonation update mechanic flaw

    Yeah it wasn't a big change and WG should go further but at least it got rid of splash damage detonations from full health.
  7. Enough with the radar B.S.

    You can't wipe out a DD advantage with radar you can just mitigate the effects of that disadvantage because radar in its current iteration does not simply shut down DD play as many insist on claiming. It simply alters it. The game where catapult aircraft circle in a small orbital path around my ship not the fantasy game you've created where catapult planes are ranging far afield of my cruiser keeping DDs lit for me to shoot at. Really go pop hydro and get your dual fighters up in any cruiser of your choice and try and hunt down a Fletcher with a functioning brain and tell me how it goes. When the hunter can't ever see his target he's not going to be a very effective hunter. I'm also not sure why seeing a DD constitutes a turkey shoot but whatever. Dealing damage is a far easier concept to understand than things like potential damage, spotting damage, caps and smoking your teammates. Because at the end of the day your average player is still going to feel far more proud of the 300k damage loss than the 20k damage win where his spotting, scouting, smoking, and capping was vital to victory. Now if we change the rewards, as I agree we should, that will change how these actions are rewarded and that's a good thing but the average player still won't be hopping into his DD thinking about all the awesome scouting he's going to do. He wants the big damage torpedo hits. Not against stealthy DDs at least without the magical DD hunting catapult planes I don't seem to have access to. Removing OWSF had unfortunate changes WG still hasn't addressed (US DD gun blooms are absurd and far more of an impediment to cap contesting than radar) so no I'm not anxious to mess around with something that's really working fine just to appease DD players who insist on playing high tiers without being able to read and interpret the minimap. ? Or were you just stating the things that could spot DDs without saying they are effective in that role? I mean you could proxy spot a DD once they get within 2 km. 3 if you run the excellent spotting module. Yet that really has no bearing on anything since you're never going to effectively counter a stealthy DD by proxy spotting him. Their speed is almost identical so no realistically you're not even catching the Akizuki (the slowest high-tier DD in the game) without even going into the 6km base concealment difference which will get your destroyer hunting radarless Chapayev blown to bits trying to run down the Akizuki in any realistic scenario. That being said I don't think anyone would argue for the necessity of radar if the only DDs in the game were like the Akizuki. Or they were all Russian gunboats. But they're not. I'm only creating scenarios to try and illustrate what should be an obvious point. Take the radar off your Chapayev, spec it with RPF and catapult fighters run that hydro and go DD hunting in as many random battles as you want. I'll eagerly await your tales of how effective you were at hunting down DDs with all those amazing counters.
  8. Enough with the radar B.S.

    By your own standards the same is true of hydro. When a DD is revealed by hydro anyone in range can start taking shots at him. Now I agree it's not a terrible idea to encourage ships to be within range of the radar in order to benefit from it but the trouble is when you do this you need to address both the survivability of many radar cruisers which will struggle to consistently operate where they need to in order for their team to take any significant advantage from their radars and the much reduced effectiveness of radar. If only ships in radar range get to shoot at what the radar spots radar will need either a boost to range or a big increase in active time. Or both. Or more. It's just not worth it given that nothing is really wrong with how radar works now. Like I've said I don't know how to explain the fact that catapult planes do not let cruisers effectively counter DDs any further than I already have. They simply don't have the range to start with and the orbital flight path means you will never get to keep eyes even on the DDs dumb enough to get caught who can always just pop smoke for the brief seconds they will be spotted. Hydro also doesn't have the effective range, RPF only tells you where the DD is but you don't have the speed to run him down and gun bloom doesn't matter since we're talking about normal torpedo based DDs not the Khabaravosk and it's ilk which you obviously don't need radar to counter. The only realistically effective counters are other DDs, CVs and radar.
  9. Enough with the radar B.S.

    Radar in no way wipes out a DD advantage. At most it reduces the effects of that disadvantage. I don't see why that's unreasonable particularly when the alternative is 9 players suffering more because their three potatoes DD are matched up against three competent ones. Again it's the carrier problem. A skill disparity between a minority of players shouldn't have that much of an impact on a match but the more you make a class of ships the only realistic counter to itself (like carriers!) the more that happens. You keep repeating this but it doesn't make it so. There are three counters of varying effectiveness against a stealthy destroyer at high tiers: carriers, another stealthy destroyer, and radar. Catapult planes do not have the range to effectively counter a ship with sub 6km detection and 12km torpedoes. I suspect WG wants big damage>over all because big numbers are easy to understand and appealing to players. Even most DD players are in it for the big torpedo strikes not smoking up their teammates and spotting the enemy. Like I said though I agree with you I just think it's completely implausible that WG will ever overhaul rewards to that extent. Of course CAs can do plenty without radar but they can't counter stealthy DDs even remotely effectively without radar because they simply can't see them. Destroyers will always have low survival rates without a major overhaul of how this game works. That's fine if that's what we want to talk about but it has very little to do with radar. I still can't believe you're arguing that catapult planes are an effective counter to stealthy DDs. If you cannot understand or refuse to acknowledge that CAs finding and engaging DDs without radar is effectively impossibly I don't know how else to explain it to you. I don't have to make up anything. Take a Hipper into the game and try and go DD hunting. It should be eye opening if you genuinely can't grasp this. Okay you're not asking for anything to be done to radar. That has nothing to do with what you've been claiming over these past few posts about how cruisers already have effective counters against DDs without radar. They don't. I am perfectly serious when I say cruisers, on their own, are helpless against DDs without radar. Without radar they either need a CV or another DD to be capable of doing anything to a stealthy DD. Perhaps the game developers also figured out that asking slower ships with vastly worse concealment to counter DDs without radar is effectively impossible. Can't be certain though. It's a tough concept to grasp apparently.
  10. Enough with the radar B.S.

    You don't. You just have to look at the minimap and understand the potential threats. The same thing you would have to do without radar or with LoS radar. Radar is just another factor. High-tier DD play is much harder than mid and low tier DD play. Same with every class. That's the nature of the beast. If the average player genuinely can't handle this then there are many tiers he can play in where radar is barely seen. The game shouldn't be altered simply to appease average DD players anymore than it should be for average BB players who never leave spawn because torpedoes and guns are dangerous (and yes maybe in some ways WG has done just that but I'm not going to oppose WG catering to BBs just to turn around and demand they cater to DDs too. They shouldn't cater to any class). Yes radar does exacerbate the issue but my point was DDs being low damage and low survival isn't caused by radar it's caused by the nature of DD play. And these anti-concealment mechanics are? Catapult planes? Hydro? There aren't really any outside of another stealthy DD particularly at high tiers where the gulf between DD detection and torpedo ranges starts getting bigger and bigger. And cruisers don't really work when they literally can't do anything to a DD without help from their own DDs. Radar cruisers don't have an unlimited or permanent ability to dictate the terms of the engagement. They simply have a better than zero chance of being to do so unlike their non-radar counterparts. Any DD with a brain will never be countered by a Hipper because he will never see him. All I can do is zone him out of a small area. Radar cruisers can zone him out of a bigger area. There is no reason for this to be beyond the pale for DDs to have to deal with. There isn't an issue with DDs countering DDs. The issue is when DDs are the only counter to other DDs something which holds true for no other class in the game except arguably carriers (and carriers are in such a great place because of it). When you remove radar that's what you're doing. When you nerf radar that's what you're moving towards and it's just not needed. -That's because concealment as a primary defense is binary. You're either concealed or you're not. Again nature of the class. DDs already deal with this and will always deal with it. Radar simply makes it easier for certain ships to strip away their concealment for a limited amount of time. -If radar did direct damage this would be a valid point. It doesn't though. All it does is show you the target. Actually damaging or destroying him takes as much "skill" as HE spam or overmatch. And the DD has plenty of skill-based ways to counter being seen by radar or being hurt by fire once he is spotted. -What? So cruisers shouldn't be able to protect other ships with Def AA? Hydro should only let you see the torps and not the teammates sailing around you? This rule you've created has no basis in the game. The truth is radar rewards good teamplay. That should be encouraged not discouraged. -Then you need to come up with a way in which DD stealth works like armor or health instead of being totally binary. That's why reworking this is far more trouble than its worth. -True enough but high-tier games are already passive and always will be. This is like stealth firing and smoke firing. Removed them both games are still passive at high tiers. Radar isn't causing it either. -You still haven't come up with any way how a cruiser or battleship can be meaningfully said to counter a DD without a mechanic like radar. -Depending on team compositions yes but again so what? Every ship can be screwed by team compositions. I think radar cruisers should be balanced by teams. Maybe even put a hard cap on them. But that's a vast difference between that and nerfing or removing radar entirely. It works fine as it is. I don't think you want DDs to be made an exception to the rules I just don't see why you consider it so beyond the pale for DDs to have restrictions on safe movement due to radar that are far less onerous than the ones applied every match to battleships and cruisers. There is nothing so unique about the class that its players can't be expected to read and understand the minimap before rushing into a cap. It would be better for DDs player. Less threats are always better. The reality however is there is a reason radar was put in this game and it is performing a necessary function that doesn't need to be tinkered with.
  11. Enough with the radar B.S.

    Make it three or four or as many cruisers as you want. Unless you've somehow managed to get yourself completely surrounded the cruisers will literally never be able to spot the DD without another stealthy DD or a mechanic like radar. Catapult planes simply don't cut it at tiers where destroyer concealment can start going below 6km with 12km torpedoes. And yes it's an ideal situation. For the cruiser. In a real game the perma-spotted cruiser trying to hunt the DD will be focused down and wiped out by enemy ships from all over the map in short order. Radar is an imperfect but necessary attempt to try and let cruisers actually do their supposed job of countering DDs. Of course it isn't the only way in a normal game. DDs are most often spotted by other DDs even now. But in the context of CAs countering DDs radar or a similar mechanic is literally the only way to enable them to actually do that without the support of a DD. If your counter can't actually counter you without the help of another class it can't pretend to be even the softest of counters because it is literally helpless without support. In which case what is the point of cruisers? Do you really expect WG to upend the damage-centric model of rewarding XP and credits? Again I agree that'd be great but I don't think it's realistic. However I really don't know what any of this has to do with radar. Because a one on one scenario makes the issue most apparent. Make it 12 competent destroyers vs 12 competent cruisers. Or any combination thereof. Without a mechanic like radar the cruisers are literally helpless against the destroyers because they will never see them and the most they can hope to do is survive the inevitable waves of torpedoes. How is that not the definition of helpless? I don't care about a strict formula but it's ridiculous to argue that DDs should only get effectively countered by other DDs. That's the carrier problem of a few player skill disparities having way too much influence on a match all over again while making cruisers less relevant and other types of players more frustrated. I'd rather be light up by radar in a DD than be perma-spotted by a DD in a cruiser. If CVs became a thing again it would be more reasonable to reconsider radar. But given the woeful state of CVs right now that's the last thing this game needs. Furthermore as a DD player I'll take radar any day of the week over being perma-spotted by planes and I don't even use destroyers that have bad AA. Catapult aircraft however are simply not a real counter to DDs at high tiers. They just don't have the range. Ideally they help with spotting torpedoes sooner and that's about it. Again though without radar or something like it how are the cruisers expected to counter something they can't see? That is the unavoidable issue.
  12. Enough with the radar B.S.

    You really don't have to be unicum to understand that it is not that difficult to keep a few kms between you and enemy cruisers. Low damage and low survival are the nature of the DD game. Their most damaging weapons are inherently inconsistent, their mistakes are more often instantly fatal, they tend to fight other low-health ships and obviously attrition weighs most heavily on them. But none of this has much of anything to do with radar. In the tiers without radar DDs are still mostly riding the bottom in terms of survival and damage. I agree with you in terms of reducing gun bloom but this changes nothing about the fact that you're still arguing that the only counter to a stealthy DD should be another stealthy DD. If that's your position that's fine even I don't agree but then why does a stealthy DD counter a battleship? Why do battleships get to counter cruisers? Why are DDs the only class that should be made immune to inter-class countering? And to counter a concealment ship you need to strip away their concealment and the only way to do that short of another concealed ship creeping up on them is through radar or a radar like mechanic that strips away their concealment. But you can cross that line depending on the circumstances. You can reverse into position. You can bait out the radar. You can use hard cover to wait out the radar. This is just a restating the argument that radar shuts down DD play and it isn't the case. It changes it. Because you're not matching the points. I don't mean to be rude because I appreciate the fact that you're actually willing to intelligently debate this but you still haven't answered why restrictions on DDs imposed by the presence of radar are unacceptable but restrictions on cruisers and battleships due to a myriad of reasons are okay beyond the fact that DDs are concealment ships. That's great I agree but then why does the concealment ship get to only be countered by another concealment ship while the battleships and cruisers still get countered to varying degrees by the DD? It would be like a battleship saying he's a tank so he can only be countered by another tank and DD and cruisers should no longer be able to hurt him. It doesn't make any sense and it wouldn't be a healthy way to approach this game.
  13. Enough with the radar B.S.

    Pretty much. And if I can do it is not some unicum level talent to keep a few kms between yourself a cruiser. I acknowledged carriers and fighters and spotter planes have a limited radius and constant path around a ship as well as a limited up time (particularly with BBs). They work better at lower tiers where the gap between torpedo range and DD concealment is closer but in a Fletcher for instance? You've got plenty of wiggle room. And again even if I do make a mistake I can almost always just pop smoke to buy time and then add more distance. Catapult aircraft can only do so much. RPF only tells you where I am it doesn't let you see me and kill me because I'm faster than your cruiser or a battleship. A faster DD with RPF could run me down sure but then we're back to needing DDs to counter DDs. You're never going to square the circle of countering DDs with a cruiser without radar or a radar like mechanic or completely reworking how concealment works in this game. Which isn't really an answer to my question just an explanation as to why DDs have less armor and health than other ships. Battleships and cruisers are far more limited in movement in every single high-tier game than a DD but it's apparently unacceptable for a DD to have even the slightest limitations imposed on where he can safely go by the presence or potential presence of radar? Finally it is far from likely that a cruiser can see and fire back at all of the ships firing on him in a high-tier game. That's a nice goal but completely unachievable in the current state of the game and radar, whether LoS or not is really one of the most minor problems with achieving that goal. As for any ship having an equal chance of survival against an evenly matched player again in the current state of the game that is too much to ask. A competent battleship versus a competent stealth torping DD has zero chance of survival over a long enough period. His only hope of survival is that the game will end before he's killed while never having a chance to fight back against his attacker. But let a cruiser player simply reveal, not inherently kill or damage, simply reveal a DD with a short-term limited consumable and it's unacceptable. Doesn't make much sense.
  14. Enough with the radar B.S.

    Without radar (or a carrier) the only way you're spotting me in a stealthy DD under normal conditions is with another stealthy DD. I have little reason in a Fletcher to ever let myself get spotted normally by a cruiser or battleship and even if I screw up and do get spotted there's a good chance that I have a smoke ready to pop that will allow me to fall back into concealment with ease. There are no shortage of opportunities to engage DDs without radar so long as your DDs are spotting and engaging the opposing DDs. If that isn't the case there are few opportunities to engage even as it stands and there would be even fewer without radar. Theoretically it could work. We don't necessarily need non-LoS radar in the game it's just that rebalancing the game for it to work well would be a lot more trouble than it's worth. For instance I think we can both agree that if radar does become aimed/gun-based the active time of radar at the very least would need to be increased. Is that what people really want? However again I would really like it answered as to why it's okay to expect cruisers and battleships to play around potential AP shells from all over the map, potential torpedoes from unseen DDs, spotting from unseen DDs, HE spam and so on, but it's beyond the pale to expect DDs to play around the threat of a short-term limited consumable mounted on a limited number of ships. DDs work in the face of radar as it currently stands, both theoretically and practically. They just have to play a little bit different.
  15. Enough with the radar B.S.

    I'm saying that WoWs is history is obviously incorrect. Ships didn't have cloaking devices that let them disappear from view at under 6km in open water and in clear weather. Radar didn't go through land masses. You can't selectively argue for realism in one area while ignoring it in another. No World of Warships does not try to make it as realistic as possible. You're arguing that since they use historical ship designs (ignoring the ones they make up of course) they're trying to make the game as realistic as possible when that is clearly not the case. A realistic game about this period of naval warfare would probably be great and a lot of fun. However it would be nothing like World of Warships.