Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'radar'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Master Archive
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Closed Beta Test Archive
    • Alpha Test Archive
    • For Development and Publisher Only
    • QA AUTO
    • Contests and Community Events
    • Super Test
    • Newcomer's Forum
    • Contest Entries
    • Questions and Answers
    • Contest Entries
    • New Captains
    • Guías y Estrategias
    • Task Force 58
    • Livestream Ideas and Feedback
    • Árboles Tecnológicos
    • Fan Art and Community Creations
    • Community Created Events and Contests
    • Community Staging Ground
    • Forum Reorg 2.0 Archive
    • Noticias y Anuncios

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 47 results

  1. You know how in real life radar would both detect distant threats as well as make you detected to them? If you institute a global change that makes radar reveal you to every target it spots for you, suddenly Belfast isn't nearly as powerful. The extreme synergy of its consumables goes out the window. Not only that, but longer radar range would be a double edged sword, making it a risk you are willing to take to use it rather than a no brainer to activate it when you need it. Okay, now I can sleep. This idea was keeping me awake...
  2. Final8ty

    This was fun

    It only took 7 mins and you know which side won.
  3. Rigger43E

    WG doesn't care

    So, there is now a movement to boycott the next CB season over CV's. I can get on board with that idea but it's not just CV's. Why are you so unresponsive to basic issues? Yes, CV's in CB are a non starter but let me list what I see issues you seeming give no ear to. 1. Radar and Hydro spotting through solid objects(Islands). This is a line of sight issue people and I'm sure you can fix this. You just won't. 2. How the heck do you have a Tier X DD(Sommers) with practically no AA?? No WWII DD was so hamstrung! It should be in the same neighborhood has it's contemporaries like the gearing. 3. CV's in WWII could not directly affect targeting of surface units. Don't let CV's feed spotting info to their team. They can attack what they find but no sharing. And limitless airplanes?? Just no. 4. I realize this item will be most contentious to WG staff directly but it is what it is. Enough with the make believe russian ships! In WWII Russia just didn't have a navy like the other nations in the game. You aren't inventing make believe ships for Australia/Canada so why for Russia? Please seriously consider these items.
  4. Privet komrad I bring you my honest ways on how to make this game more balanced and enjoyable for all classes(even bringing harmony between dds and cvs) 1: radar Radar can be changed in 2 ways: Real radar: radar/hydro can’t detect through islands. This will guarantee that cruisers can still detect smoked up dds but they can’t do it behind the safety of islands with absolutely no penalties and dds can spot and detect as long as they stay out of eye of sight of radar. Submarine like radar: What I mean by this is like the submarine pings. You get pings that cost battery. it can also recharge. I think this is more intuitive and much better. This can also be implemented with the first radar change I suggest as well as radar range change. Ships can change radar range. So if you choose to use a 12km radar, you can freely use it but it will cost a lot of battery. this will also make sure you don’t get so much Russian cruiser spam. Cvs: 1: universal AA range The 40mm bofors on the montana have a 6km range, on the gearing they have 5.8km. and the 40mm bofors on the montana have the same range as the 128mm l/61 on the gk. Just they like diversity radar change for cruisers, they should diversify AA range on each gun. But each gun doesn’t change the range on a different ship. Each AA mount has a range, be it on the ground, a battleship or a submarine. 2: manual fire control Im going to sum this with the third point to make this shorter if a cv deploys a fighter next to its torpedo bombers around a ship. The ship will do the exact same damage for both the fighter and the torpedo bobmers. It’s not hard to see you should and must prioritize the torpedo bomber. Use all available AA for that squadrum. With that, flak bursts should make a LOT more AA damage. A cv can just send a squadrum, ignore flaks and still release their torpedos/bombs. Just like battleships get punished for going in straight lines, airplane squadrums should get absolutely nuked if they keep going in astraight line ignoring flak.it shouldn’t happen just to heavily AA mounted ships like the haaland. DDs: There really is only one thing I want to see change regarding dds. Overpens. A yamato can’t do 6 overpens and the dd just 6khp but be happily sailing like nothing happened. There’s some astonishing dd survival stories like the hms Cossack but if you get 6 overpens from a 460mm shell you should get severely punished. Overpens of high caliber should still do monstrous damage. It shouldn’t take a battleship 3 salvos to kill a DD BBs: Bbs should have a fire control more like the Russian battleships. They should get more damage control parties but can use quicker. This will severely help them against he spam and torpedos as well as keepingthe he spammers happy as if they used all their damage cons they are still at the mercy of the he spammers. Cruisers: Armour: Just like bbs. There’s isn’t much to change (besides radar) and that’s the 50mm armour belt. no cruiser should be able to bow in a shikashima or even a montana. Make the 27mm more prevelant with other cruisers or even 30 or 32mm bows but 50mm armor belts shouldn’t be a thing with some special cases like the super heavy Kroonstad class Sap: You should not do 12k salvos to a bow in hindi unless you are sailing a battleship. Sap should kill dds but it shouldn’t kill cruisers and battleships that quickly either. In order to make sap viable I would suggest nerfing the damage and and severely nerfing the penetration angles. If you’re bow in in ashima you should get nuked, if you’re bow in in a dm, you shouldn’t get nuked every 20s seconds. These are changes I would love to see implemented and I think would make the game far more enjoyable for every class and keeping harmony with all players. What do you think? Please share your feedback because unlike waraming, I care to see other’s opinion.
  5. Now that WG has reintroduced stealth radar to the game with the new Soviet cruisers, they should also address an inconsistency they created when the US cruiser radar ranges were changed to eliminate stealth radar several years ago. All US heavy cruisers' radar ranges were normalized to 10 km, while US light cruisers all received 9 km ranges (except Atlanta). The exception to that was the US tier 8 premium USS Wichita which was given the light cruiser radar because if it was given the standard US CA 10 km radar, it would have had the ability to stealth radar for 500 m (max concealment for Wichita 9.5 km). So, the Wichita was equipped with the US CL radar, yet her consumables received none of the other benefits of a US CL (e.g. you have to choose between hydro and DFAA). The Wichita is a fine ship and a good T8 CA, but in the mind of many she is lacking something to make her a compelling premium. The best way to remedy that would be to correct her flawed radar range and raise it to 10 km like every other US CA. However, if she is going to remain a up gunned, up armored light cruiser, with 9 km radar, then that should apply to all of her consumables and DFAA should be moved to a dedicated slot, giving her consumables the utility of a US light cruiser.
  6. hammer_1

    USN Radar

    Since by tier 8 ALL us BBs had radar, not to mention cruisers, it offends me that my late tier US BB which has radar on its game model but NONE in game. For reference, my late father in law was a radar technician assigned to a Liberty (cargo) ship in WW2. My father was a radar operator on a US Heavy Cruiser. Why is it not at least an option to equip ALL tier 8 and above BBs, and CAs with radar? Having a tier X USN BB with its radar screen twirling, but no Radar is noxious. Vote your opinion Thanks
  7. tm63au

    RDF Needs To GO

    Its about time WG had a look RDF as Captain skill and got rid of it we have so much Radar and Hydro in games not to mention CVs spotting and they still have this skill, its a hard enough trying to avoid the other 3 detection systems and have this shoved on you the second the battle starts in a DD. We got Subs coming with Hydrophones and homing torpedo and not the authentic ones of the second world war, you escape radar and Hydro acoustics even planes but RDF out trying to cap or spot for capital ships your targeted permanently until someone else pushes ahead of you generally its another DD and then hes in the same situation. Cant remember what it replaced but whatever it was its to get rid RDF and bring back the former Captain skill or is WG planning to allow Sub Captains to have that skill. This is only tonight not counting every other night and day i play, played 5 games in DDs soon as the battle started hit with RDF in games with multiple enemy radar ships, CV's trying to cap all the while your support and capital ships are parked behind islands ( the new island META ) I don't mind a challenge but this has to removed since WG wont fix radar, we just got a new DD with radar, whats next " infra red, satellite tracking ".
  8. MaxMcKay

    True night battles.

    I would love to see a true night fight in the game. Where it truly is dark, a new moon out on the sea. So that it's a choice of risking the search lights to look for a enemy ship, or hydro/radar. Or flares dropped from planes to illuminate a target to attack. There are countless possibilities that could be used in this type of environment. Doing night battles this way would give players another mode of game style that can be used on maps. Also for those that are sensitive to the search lights glare, we could use a filter to take down some of the glare or allow players to use colored lights that would bother them less. Was thinking this over for a bit. I do hope this could be done soon as it would be truly fun to try to get these types of cat and mouse games going.
  9. I just finished a round with 5 Smolensk cruisers, a CV, and multiple radar ships. I was staying back not trying to cap, but I got detected, rocketed, and sunk in under 5 minutes. I never got to fire a shot. Seems like in many, many high tier games, the DDs are the first to die, often without firing a shot. It seems the combination of planes, LOTS of radar/sonar ships and LOTS of premium HE spammers makes it very difficult for the DD player to survive, much less play. Any alone could be dealt with, but all together it is a combined arms situation weighed heavily against the DD. You can hang back in a dd, if you can take the screaming chat and even reports of poor play for not scouting out in front foor your team. It is no fun at all to spend months grinding to a high tier DD to find out it only serves as a target for the premium ships. Anybody else seeing this? If would be interesting to see what % of DDs die while either detected by radar/plane or within 30 seconds of when they were last detected by radar/planes.
  10. I'm collecting data for the Minotaur and only the Minotaur. If have other RN CLs, great, but this poll is for Minotaur players' votes only please. Please keep the topic civil, there is no "better" consumable (I don't want to see discrimination against either smoke or radar users). All I'm doing is collecting data for the present, note this poll also refers to random battles and random battles only please. Playing 1 game in either smoke or radar and voting for that 1 game you played isn't accurate, I'm talking about playing at least 50% of your games using 1 specific consumable. If you use Minotaur in CB that's cool, but the only real reason is really for the radar. If you could explain when and why you use either consumable that would be great (optional). Personally I use the radar because it has larger influence on the game usually leading to a higher win rate, but yields less damage potential. I play Minotaur as a kiting ship when I can (early game) and I camp behind islands whenever I can to help out with radar. The Minotaur has been the first RN CL I have used radar on because of its manoeuvrability and stealth. You can still manage to deal decent damage with a radar Minotaur, but I have to warn you, it's literally one of the hardest ships to play in the game. If you can make it work, then it is extremely rewarding and well worth playing without the smoke. If I bonked up the poll please let me know, I haven't posted polls in a while.
  11. Jumarka

    Coming back

    Well, after letting the game rest for some time I have come back. And I feel, should have waited for the relesase of subs A few battles in, and every thing that chased me out of the game is still present: Radar still goes trought solid rock. Fire chance and damage continue to be some major [edited] Ships sniping you from inside smoke screens with perfect aim. Ships sitting in the smoke screen while their AAA wipe out planes. NO GERMAN SHIP FOR COAL Thera are things I like: CVs rework, MM balance, all the containers collection on the arsenal and the new autopilot, I think I am going to stay a little longer to see if the introduction of subs forces WG to make other changes (nice to see that you apparently cant Sonar Ping ships trought islands)
  12. It seems to me that a radar blip should either be smaller or something depending on the target profile on a one-on-one encounter. In other words when a DD is plowing straight towards a BB, that either would be detected at a closer range because of the smaller cross section, but detected at a further distance if viewed from the side. Perhaps the detection range would be distorted rather than a perfect circle around a ship. Wider at the sides, reducing as it approaches the center axis of the ship. Would that be possible?
  13. With the ongoing threats that the broken CV meta and Radar Cruisers pose to Destroyers. How many of you think that making Radar a damageable module would help balance gameplay for DD's? After all, the rotating Radar dish on a ship is a real thing is it not? Just like torpedo tubes, guns (both main battery and secondary), engines, and rudders can be broken. By doing this the destroyer has a better chance of surviving what would normally be a perma spotting situation by CVs and Radar and the ultimate annihilation of DD's in a battle. Any ideas?
  14. So, radar is kind of broken at the moment. As we all know. And as a dd player its been frustrating me for quite some time. So I got thinking on how this problem could be fixed? Radar, typically works by sending out pulses and getting feedback from the return pulses - very simple overview of how it works. So if this were to be implemented into wows how would it look? By the picture I would say that the radar consumable should get pulse charges when activated. Say a tier 10 gets 9-12 pulse charges that pulse up to 4/5 km. then once a pulse hits a ship, instead of it being magically visible rather a red highlight of the ship appears for 1-3 secs depending on the tier of radar used and then the player can then shoot at the red silhouette for whilst its visible before disappearing. I think this is much more skilful and realistic implementation of radar than the one that currently exists. Refer to picture above for a VERY bad visual representation of my idea.
  15. (Keep in mind I'm not a DD main) No matter what ship main you are you cant deny that DDs are in a rather bad spot right now between common CVs and Radar. So, I've thought of some ideas that can help the DDs out a bit (these may not be the best but they are better then nothing and Far better then just removing CVs bla bla blah) 1: Give Destroyers the Fighter consumable. This may seem odd to some but this will make a DD have Far better odds of survival when being attacked by Carriers, Some will argue that it makes no sense for a Destroyer to have the fighter consumable when it has no catapults. but to that I would argue that it would work the same way as the Fighter consumable for Planes where they call them in from the Carrier. After all Bombers don't have catapults. This also has the benefit of making it WG doesn't need to make so many Blanket Buffs and Nerfs to AA and planes to try to solve the issue. 2: Give all Higher tier Destroyers a Heal like Cruisers, I'm thinking around USS Kidd Level. This will make it that if a Destroyer gets attacked by aircraft or Radared it can at least get some HP back. Though of course the Destroyers like Khab that are based around their Heal will just have a stronger one. 3: (This is more of a change to all ships then just Destroyers) Manual Control of Large caliber Flak. (flack shells for Destroyers) So this is how i would do it: make it that the AA stays the way it currently is But for most ships there is a "4" Button that makes you take Manual control of the flak AA on the ship you are using. for battleships and cruisers this would be their secondaries. but for destroyers these would be their main guns so they would be a little different. While larger ships will just have control of their secondaries etc the destroyers would need to load "Flak shells" in loading these it would change the camera angle to be better suited for following aircraft and would allow you to lock onto planes like you would a ship, then a Aiming recital would appear (similar to the [edited] SPAA or World of Warplanes recital.) and then you fire Flak shells at the aircraft with lead and all Just like you would shoot a ship. this will Drastically improve AA performance but you would need to actually use your guns so this wont be a good idea when enemy ships are close. the AA would perform the same as it does now if you don't use the flack shells. While the last one is Unlikely i would Strongly advise the other two. If you can think of other things they can do for CVs Let me know of that and your thoughts on these ideas below.
  16. nastydamnanimal

    SMOKE+CHAFF consumable

    I need smoke and anti radar chaff in one consumable for my mino. What youzz think about it?
  17. Jumarka

    Small rant

    This is me venting here so I don't do it on chat in the game and annoy people. These things break the game for me, they totally ruin my enjoyment of it. Every time I get radared trough an island that should conceal my ship ( and by ship i mean dd ) Every time my planes get blotted out of the sky by a ship sitting in a smoke screen. EVERY SINGLE TIME I get shot with pinpoint accuracy from inside a smoke screen. So, just some, simple ideas that would improve the game for me, a great deal. 1 - Radar won't work trough islands. 2 - Ships inside smoke can't see or target ships outside of it. You can still track them in the minimap. 3 - AAA can't work inside smoke. A lot of me me me here, but like I said, these things ruin the game for me, If you enjoy those things OK I am not against you.
  18. Radar is incredibly unbalanced. It completely removes the ability for ships to use terrain, smoke, and smart navigation to avoid detection, in some cases, out to 12km. The most effected by this consumable, obviously, are destroyers. Many of which rely heavily on their ability to remain concealed to perform their roles for their team. As it is now, destroyers are handicapped by the inability to scout and spot for their teams, and engagements at moderate to short range are practically impossible if a ship equipped with radar is nearby. A destroyer captain could attempt to avoid the radar ship, but that quickly proves impractical, especially when there are multiple radar equipped ships in the game at a time. Not only does this completely and totally render smoke screens useless, but it also means that using terrain, such as islands, for cover and to set ambushes is also suicide. A destroyer does not have the ability to know if a ship with radar is nearby until they get visual confirmation, or until the radar consumable is used. A radar ship, on the other hand, can be on the other side of an island chain, with no visual on the destroyer, and can use their consumable radar to make it impossible for the destroyer to use terrain or smoke to hide - it makes the destroyer visible to the entire team, even those without radar. If a destroyer is trying to get within range to use their torpedoes effectively on the enemy, they typically have to close to somewhere between 6-9km. Even those that are capable of reaching out to 13km or better typically try to get as close as possible to improve accuracy. This means that any time a destroyer moves in to use what is their primary damage dealing weapon, they are in danger of being spotted for the entire enemy team, even if their concealment allows them to get to 6km or less without detection. If the destroyer is at 7km when a radar ship turns on their consumable, the destroyer now has to survive 20-40 seconds of potentially focused fire from the entire enemy team, or somehow determine the source of the radar and move 3km+ while under heavy fire to escape. Terrain cannot be relied on, because fire could be coming from any direction since the entire enemy team can see them. So even if they turn a corner in attempts to break lines of sight, there is no guarantee that they will still not be under heavy fire. What you have is a consumable that completely and totally shuts down an entire type of ship, and there is NO counter to it. No other ship has a consumable that does this. No other ship is capable of making an enemy ship entirely worthless in all situations. Twenty three ships are capable of using radar, nineteen of which are tier 8's or above. This means that if you are using a tier 8, 9, or 10 destroyer, the odds are you will face at least one radar ship in every match. I propose three potential solutions, designed to make the radar less overpowered, while still retaining it's purpose and still being useful. Option 1: Allow only the ship using radar to see ships uncovered by their radar. This means that if they use it to search a smoke screen, they can see a hidden destroyer. They can also still use it to track and report the movements of the enemy destroyers in island chains. But this prevents the entire enemy team from seeing and firing at the destroyer that SHOULD be invisible to them outside of the destroyers detection range. It makes absolutely no sense for ships that are NOT equipped with radar to suddenly be able to spot a ship at 10km they couldn't see at 6km because a friendly told them the approximate location of the ship. The radar doesn't make the ship glow. It doesn't fire off flares or fireworks. It's not as if the destroyer is suddenly firing their main guns and aa as if to say, "Here I am!" So why should that visibility be shared with ships that otherwise wouldn't be spotting the destroyer? This change would allow those equipped with radar to still perform their roles. They could still hunt destroyers. They could still detect nearby enemies that are otherwise obscured and use their map to report movements and approximate locations to their team. It would allow them to counter a smoke screen that is confounding their teams ability to fight back against hidden targets. It would also allow them to get a good idea of where the destroyer is, where it's going, and continue tracking them. Meanwhile, destroyers would still need to be cautious of radar ships. They could still be detected easily, and hounded by a ship with superior firepower and health. However, being put into a match with a radar ship wouldn't be a death sentence the second they turn the radar on. Option 2: Shorten the range and duration of radar. Plain and simple. These detection ranges are picking up destroyers that are practically invisible outside 6-7km and making it so that those destroyers are not only visible, but stuck in a 2-6km kill box that literally everyone on the enemy team can see them and there's nothing they can do about it for up to 40 seconds! Shorten the ranges to 6-9km with the longer ranges having shorter duration. Duration should range from 10-30 seconds. This still leaves the destroyer in a dangerous, but not insurmountable situation. They still have a km or two to escape, or a 10-30 second window to survive. To expect ships that have 25000-40000 health to be able to survive up to 45 seconds of focused fire from virtually any direction all at once is ludicrous. A single good volley from a tier x cruiser can completely destroy these ships. To remove their ONLY defense against the superior firepower of the entire enemy team at nearly a minute at a time is crazy. Especially when you consider there could be several ships with radar on the enemy team! Combined, those radar ships could effectively make it impossible for the destroyer to do anything without being spotted for the entirety of the match. Option 3: Remove the god-like detection ability of radar. Allow terrain to block it so that if there is terrain between the radar ship and whatever it is trying to detect, they can not see it. This still makes open water situations, and smoke screens very dangerous for destroyers. But it means that with care and experience, they can counter the radar and even break it's detection by using island chains to their advantage. In all three options, I also suggest adding a marker visible on the HUD that indicates the source of the radar. if not marking the ship itself, at least mark the direction clearly so that the detected ship at least knows which direction they need to run away from to try to escape detection. Something, though, needs to be done. In no other situation in the game is any other consumable able to completely and totally shut down an entire ship type.
  19. I know in the movies they give away there position by going to active sonar for subs and Modern day destroyers just wanting to know If your going to make that a possible thing that maybe allows them to detect you like maybe just a radar ripple going off on your minimap like it the movies the flight of the intruder has a screen where there radar towers...Also Maybe see if you can introduce some maps with he ability that when you capture a place and hold it for 30 seconds it allows a boost to detection via a radar array on the capture points Island or a lookout tower or maybe an automated gun :) or control of Land Based artillery guns for each Division Commander
  20. Lots of percolating ideas. I am fairly sure these will gain little traction but I figured I'd put them all in one place. Feel free to share/comment/ridicule (but be nice please, I only mean this as a thought experiment and am not really as salty as this sounds). In general WoWS is a great time and lots of fun. However I'd like to see a few things different and thought about differently perhaps, as while this is definitely not a simulation, nor is it historical, there are some mechanics that defy logic AND history, mostly regarding spotting , radar, and CV play. Here are a lot of ideas in loosely organized fashion. 1. Carrier Play and Balance In WW1, carriers were not in existence and aviation was not really considered in any fashion by warship designers. In the interwar years a few experiments were tried (notably the Fleet Problems of the USN) but it wasn't until WW2 that CVs became important and indeed dominant in the battle space. How to model this in a game that extends from the turn of the century to the 1950's?k The MM currently allows ships built with no AA whatsoever into a threat environment where they face actual WW2 escort carriers and have absolutely no recourse in the game. Unpopular Idea #1 - Limited Protected MM for certain ships. If ships don't have AA as designed because their hull configuration dates before WW1, they are in a special protected MM format that will not have them face CVs. They might still face Tier 4/5 ships, but they will never be populated into a match with CVs. This might allow carriers to be slightly un-nerfed at lower tiers because they will not have to be balanced against some ships that are completely defenseless. This also could extend to WW1 and interwar configurations not being populated against late WW2 carriers. This would affect mostly paper designs from the 1920's. This would be balanced by ship or CV tier rather than "no CVs" however. So Mutsu as an example would only see T6 CV's and be protected from seeing T8 CV's, Izumo in stock configuration would see T8 CV's but not T10. Those are glaring examples but there are a number more. I believe that by removing the relatively unprotected ships from a CV's spread, it would reduce BB/DD complaints about being able to do nothing against a CV attack and thus free the devs to un-nerf CVs slightly, since they don't have to balance between AA-god tier ships and defenseless ones. Unpopular Idea #2 - AA should be logical, not magical Revert to the old AA system with a few exceptions. Let players select squadrons to focus on, but instead of buffing artificially the dmg done, what it does is put 100% of available AA on that squadron and 0% on other squadrons on that side of the ship. AA on the UNENGAGED side still do regular damage to planes that fly there, but points are spread evenly vs ALL planes on that side and cannot be focused. This allows the player to actually prioritize targets not try to guess which way to magically move AA guns from one side to another (a mechanic which defies logic) Flak bursts from the long range AA are focused on a targeted squadron more efficiently on the engaged side for an accuracy buff, but planes on the other side are still attacked as normal. Because there is no nerf to other AA (the only nerf comes regarding the planes on the engaged side which are NOT targeted), DOT AA values might have to be adjusted downwards to improve plane survivability. Unpopular Idea #3 - Plane Management I'm definitely being pretty Anti-CV so far and I really don't mean to. Here is one mechanic that again, defies logic: the F-key and Single Unit Control. The CV Player NEEDS to be able to switch back to her ship without losing the squadron. This idea was tossed about before, but perhaps a "limited recall" function: The player is mid-strike and notices she needs to adjust her CV's autopilot, activate DF/DC/repair or some such thing. She can hit the key to return to her ship, and the planes do start to disengage out of any enemy AA auras where they then begin a holding pattern. After a brief loiter period of say 15-30 seconds they automatically head home. However, if she finishes her task on the ship, she can RETURN to the planes, re-taking manual control, as long as the planes are not back to the carrier yet. The status of the planes would be as she left them (however many remain in the squadron less any AA damage in the transit.) This lets the player focus on one thing at a time, without totally having to give up on their attacks or relegate consumables to automatic. Unpopular Idea #4 - Plane Regeneration Instead of a timer to regenerate whole planes, make it an HP-per-second repair/rearm/regenerate process. As soon as planes take damage or are lost, an arbitrary amount of HP per second timer starts on the CV building new planes. As a depleted squadron returns, it's plane's HP go into the "bank" of regenerated points. This means that the less damaged a plane is on return, the less time (if any) it needs to be ready for flight again. It also means that a plane that is more heavily damaged will still take repair time, not be magically healed upon return to the CV. This would probably have the effect of "evening out" CV strikes, rather than them being constant until 'deplaned' then having to wait a long time to regenerate planes. It would also reward more tangibly both care in avoiding AA damage and reward AA damage done from surface ships and fighters because it will actually (if only slightly) slow down the repair process because a squadron that makes it back with all planes on 10% health will still have to repair, for example. This could be balanced by "surviving" planes being able to be repaired much faster than a plane is regenerated from scratch. (for ex.) a "repairing" plane would recover points twice as quickly as a "regenerating" plane. 2. Spotting Things With Planes And Related Madness "This is NOT A SIMULATION" but.... it was only recently with the development of drones and GPS that we are able to actually direct weapons onto a target in real-time in battle, if the plane were the ONLY way of seeing the target. When you are limited to voice or coded radio communication, it is simply IMPOSSIBLE to relay positions accurately enough to direct fire. These proposals will make more sense as you progress through this novel. Unpopular Idea #5 - Spotting Things With Planes A ship spotted ONLY by planes will NOT render on the screen for a surface ship player. What spotting WILL do is cause the ship to appear in the minimap of players on the team, as a red outline (which indicates a ship with a known position that is outside visual range) Obviously this doesn't apply to CV commanders, as the player IS in the plane's POV so they can attack, but it will NOT cause the ship to render on any other player's screens. This is based on logic. A plane can radio "enemy cruiser sighted in square E-6, course 250, speed about 20 knots" but obviously can't give an exact firing solution in real time! We can barely do that NOW in the 21st century! This rewards spotting by foiling some ambushes or flanking maneuvers but at the same time won't expose that ship to a team's total focus fire. This will also let DD players take more initiative because while they might still get spotted, the chances of them escaping back to safety are higher. Torpedoes can be spotted by any planes as they would obviously radio warnings to ships. However they won't render onscreen until they are spotted directly. What they player will get is the torpedo indicate on the HUD and the verbal warning, and a buff to the range at which the torps will be seen by them (since the lookouts know where to focus!) Because spotting with planes is thus nerfed, all planes (fighters, CV craft, spotters) can return to spotting any ships and weapons in their detection range. Unpopular Idea #6 - Spotter Planes in Particular Spotter planes do NOT increase the range of main guns, nor do they give a higher viewpoint for fall of shot. What they do is add a buff to dispersion that stacks each salvo: First salvo 5%, second 10%, third 15%, etc, as long as the player DOES NOT break target lock. This reflects that the spotter is actually radioing "short" or "long" shots, not providing VR Satellite Uplink to the gun crews. Spotter Planes still can spot torpedoes and any ships they detect will render on the whole teams minimaps, but NOT visible to players on the main screen. Ships spotted by the spotter plane will NOT render in so the player can shoot at them - they will render on the minimap as a "known target outside of detection range" for the reasons listed above. This is more realistic and is a more logical and easy-to-grasp game mechanic. 3. Radar and Sonar Shenanigans While spotter planes and aircraft spotting are unrealistically effective currently, and need to be fixed as I suggest above, radar is closer to correct, but apparently radar can see through islands and again create a magical telepathic uplink that let's everyone on the team see a target ship perfectly. Again, this isn't a simulation but can't it use basic logic? Unpopular Idea #7 - Radaring, LoS, and Targeting. Radar can ONLY work within Line of Sight...Even today we can't see through mountains! However, radar CAN see through smoke and storms. Because radar would provide a real-time firing solution, so radared ships DO render onscreen for the player using radar. However, the problem with spotting is the real-time communication between ships IRL, so radared ships only show up on the rest of the team's minimaps and cannot be rendered onscreen (just like they were spotted by planes in the previous section) All ships with radar historically mounted, however, need to be able to use it. Between possibly different durations/ranges, and the fact that the rest of the team can't use it to lock on will balance the massive increase of radar ships. To make things fair in mid-tiers and in bad weather, radar ships (now most) won't have much range beyond the visual range of a cyclone/snowstorm. Bottom line, most everyone has radar, but it only helps you, only works in line of sight, and for ships you detect with it it's just like spotting with planes above and only plots enemy ships on your team's minimap. Unpopular Idea #8 - Sonar Hydroacoustic Search CAN detect ships around islands, and render torpedoes exactly (against you) - it only shares a plane-style warning to your team. Ships you detect will appear on the minimap but will NOT render on your screen because it just isn't accurate enough to aim guns with. 4. Smoke Screens and Weather Smoke screens obscure VISUAL rangefinding and targeting, but won't defeat radar or sonar. But they work both ways! Unpopular Idea #9 - Smoke is hard to see through. A ship in smoke screen will not be visually detected or rendered on screen, unless it is proximity detected. You can't see out of a smoke screen any more than you can see into one. If you use radar, you can see and target ships on the other side of a smoke screen. However sonar will only cause them to show up on the mini-map. If a teammate uses radar, the ships he detects are rendered on your mini-map but will NOT be on screen for you to shoot back, because we are not a telepathic species and don't have satellite controlled drones in this era! Radar is more common but for likely shorter duration and that data isn't shared. Planes won't be spotting things in smoke. Ships won't be shooting from smoke unless their own radar is active. Unpopular Idea #10 - weather should be more common Weather should be more variable and common - more variety of conditions which affect visual range and spotting. In fact the "Ocean" map should be used much more often but almost always have a weather event for some or all of the match. Unpopular Idea #11 - gun bloom If you fire and your gun flash is spotted, and then go behind an island breaking visual contact, your detection range should reset immediately. and you should drop back off detection if no one can see you from that point. Your gun bloom should not reveal your position in a smoke screen. (but since you won't be shooting out of it without your radar active anyway, it won't cause too much of a return to the 'bad old days' of angry smoke screens) Thanks for taking the time to read all of this! I know these fly against the stream of where WoWS is and where it is going, since this is Not A Simulation, but maybe this can start a conversation to make things more Not Impossible? I mean I'm OK with the artificial scaling of size, maneuverability, and speed; those are at least logical in a gameplay sense. But some things just don't make sense to me based on what we could do in terms of spotting. I think it will make CV play less annoying to be against and maybe more folks will leave the CV base alone. It will make DD's a bit safer as they can use their various shenanigans without fear of being insta-focused, and it would make 'stealth firing' more limited and at least logical so new players can more easily figure out how to get out of the situation. Cheers DBS
  21. So I was reading the changes to the over lapping AA zones and I noticed the diminishing returns on stacking AA. Smart. However, and please correct me if I am wrong but this is the first time I have seen Wargaming use this brilliant tactic for balance that pretty much every mmo has used for well over a decade. For example if you stun a character in World of Warcraft for 6 seconds the next stun will last 3 seconds, and the following one 1.5 seconds and then the third stun attempt the player or NPC will be immune. I would love to see more DR in game. I.e. RADAR: the first time you are hit with radar it lasts full duration...the second half duration...then at some point you are immune to its effects for some time. The same for status effects (mind you the majority of games on the market do this) Every time your effected by Flooding or Fire your resistance to said thing builds intelligently...now ships already has a system capping fire and torpedo damage but it's very static...most games have evolved to use systems on a sliding scale and I really feel like ships is WAY behind on this. I concede I am a DD main (Shima/Mino) So I am a biased player but what I really want is HEROIC GAMEPLAY. I wish all torpedo's did much less alpha damage but had more status effects and lower cooldowns, the Key to heroic game play is giving players tools and courage to survive, while also giving players a reason to get out from behind islands! I want to see players punished for running away and awarded for leading the charge. All of the greatest moment's in my three years of play have surrounded a 1v1 brawl with everything on the line from point blank range! Who here doesn't Hoo Rah a charging battleship going in for the Ram! Who here doesn't revel is the knife fight of two DDs? These moments need to be rewarded by the game system for players with the passion and courage to get in there and get a job done. That's what this game means to me. Thank you to the dev team for all their hard work, and thank you to any player that comments or emotes on this, I really appreciate your time.
  22. Radar Change DevBlog Post [I am going to ignore the CV rework for this, as it is still being patched, updated, and hotfixed.] In short, this change breaks what is currently NOT broken. Firstly, we need to take a look at the two past and currently planned “DD Survival Buffs.” The CE nerf was completely unnecessary. It did NOT solve the issues it set out to change, and created a few new ones. DDs can now move around with impunity, certain cruisers are unnecessarily adversely affected, and battleships are largely unaffected. These concealment changes encourage more passive play. The BB AP change was a bit too strong of a balance change, in my opinion. It allows DDs to rush most battleships at close range with impunity, encouraging passive play. However, it has generally done wonders to DD survivability. Now, regarding the Radar Render Delay. This six second delay is highly abusable by skilled DD players. This is due to the majority of damage being dealt during the initial 10s of a radar, as a DD can usually disengage and mitigate damage after the initial burst. By adding a delay, even a mediocre DD player can mitigate the vast majority of damage by turning away during said delay, removing that initial burst of damage. This also allows destroyers to easily bait radar usage without placing themselves at risk. So, individually, these three changes are just QoL improvements in some areas. Put together, however, you’re giving any decent DD the ability to completely exploit the entire radar mechanic. Now that BB AP has been nerfed, DDs only have to worry about cruiser fire and overpens from BBs. The introduction of a 200-500m addition to the spotting buffer *and* a six second timer to the start of radars makes a good DD player completely untouchable. Increasing the radar duration won’t resolve this issue because said DD player will not be caught in that radar. This will only make the bad players suffer more. They get caught deep within radar range, and often sail into multiple radars for no reason, dying with little to no impact on the game. This change effectively makes the lives of bad DD players even harder. The reasoning behind this nerf was to allow for "Counter Play for the CLs in Smoke and DDs against radar". Wasn’t intelligent positioning and movement enough? This change will effectively let good RN CLs get off scot free in smoke. When they see a DM in radar range, they can press W and they're out of danger, allowing them to reorient to mitigate damage and seek hardcover. The “bad” RN CLs suffer even longer radar and die a horrible death. This change does nothing for them. Not to mention, RPF allows you to be constantly aware of where the nearest ship is, so you can set up to avoid getting caught in a dangerous situation. In general, the majority of damage from a radar’s spotting comes from the first few seconds of radar duration and this delay gives people a head start to get moving. Finally, does radar really need a blanket nerf like this? Why not target specific problem cruisers and nerf duration instead? Alternatively, why not nerf the special Radar Module? Another possible solution is to reduce radar duration for US radars, and reduce range for Russian radars. 12km radars are absolutely absurd, as are 40+ second USN radars. Radar does need reworking, with the oversaturation of long range or long duration radars, but I don’t believe this is the right solution for it.
  23. I am a very good destroyer player but I have noticed that playing destroyers are nearly unplayable, I have given them an honest try and played very carefully but planes spot you all game or push you out of smoke with plane torpedoes, then you get shot by multiple ships, the game just started and a lot of your health is missing you cant heal back. I hope they fix this because I have noticed a lack of dd's recently
  24. We all know that Naysayers say nay, ice cream melts and DD players cry (...okay, all WoWS classes cry) - but since the dawn of radar we have heard the sorrowful cries to repent b/c the end was near..., and here we are. Let's all give a big thumbs up and hearty backslapping to anyone willing to count how many times Flamu uses the word 'radar': Happy hunting season, I dreamt Ranked would be T9 some day!
  25. Hello all Captains, I wonder if this idea have been visited previously by someone else or discussed in passing. However, I've had an eureka moment few days ago and though I'd share with the community. Just maybe the WG staff will take notice or implement them in the future, should they like the idea of course. (let's please not discuss the pros vs cons, usage of Radar itself in-game, this is not the thread for it) We have from secondary modules, AAA guns that get destroyed by shells damage; but not any other ship parts (Radar, Hydro, etc) However, the main usage of the "Damage Control Party I/II" consumable is limited to fire & flood damage as it is currently used. Why not allow these consumables to effectively repair the Radar (or hydro) on the ships once they are hit by the shells? in another words, introduce an area on a ship (which has Radar) to be 'hit' then to be repaired by using the "Damage Control Party I/II" (DCP). i.e. A shell hits Des Moines conning tower (again, as an example), thereby disabling its Radar consumable temporarily. The Radar consumable will be down until the cool down counter is complete, or the player activates the Damage Control Party I/II. Much like we do now with fire & flooding damage. This would make the abundance of Radar in higher tiers to be somewhat mitigated without driving a hard wedge into what is already designed into the game. It would give the players the chance to intentionally temporarily disable the ship that has radar. Allowing more tactical play/option for players. Conversely, the ship with radar would be more careful in implementation of it's radar asset or be suggested to play more wisely, tactically, or just go ham with it in fear of having it down temporarily. For the WG team, I would imagine it would take some work to add this into the game (should they take the idea on-board). But I think having the already used DCP to include the radar damage system would be a somewhat a feasible option? As a sidenote, the conning tower on ships. Besides taking damage, I believe it has no other uses in-game. Why not double the usage of that section to include the above mentioned idea. I hope what I wrote makes sense, if not I can attempt to explain further. What are your thoughts gents?