Please don't flame, this is an honest question.

[WidochMeirker]

I know radar is in the game, for good or bad, and there's no way they are taking it out.  So I'm not asking for that.  What I would like to know is has Wargaming ever given a reason (and yes I've looked) for why their radar isn't anywhere near realistic?  The reason ships in real life hide in island clusters is because radar can't find them.  It's the only legit way ships have to defend against radar.  So, we know they have a line of sight mechanic in this game, so why doesn't radar reflect off islands like it reflects off ships?  It's a physics thing.  I get it that the game is an arcade style, but they don't really bend physics like this for other things, do they?  As a destroyer captain, there is literally no counter to radar.  But in real life, island dodging is a legit way to do it.

 

I can live with the fact their 1940s era radar somehow magically gives pinpoint accuracy on ships 9km away, and even magically uses advanced WI-FI to somehow relay that pinpoint accuracy to ships not even in radio line of communication (again, islands & mountains are big).  But really, why can't it be line of sight?

[Noshiro_]

Because this is a video game and doesn't have to be realistic

[WidochMeirker]

Because this is a video game and doesn't have to be realistic

 

Did you read the original post?

[Rolkatsuki]

because the complexity of re-programming the consumable with the current game mechanics

 

I too wish for this to be fixed.

[saagri]

I know radar is in the game, for good or bad, and there's no way they are taking it out.  So I'm not asking for that.  What I would like to know is has Wargaming ever given a reason (and yes I've looked) for why their radar isn't anywhere near realistic?  The reason ships in real life hide in island clusters is because radar can't find them.  It's the only legit way ships have to defend against radar.  So, we know they have a line of sight mechanic in this game, so why doesn't radar reflect off islands like it reflects off ships?  It's a physics thing.  I get it that the game is an arcade style, but they don't really bend physics like this for other things, do they?  As a destroyer captain, there is literally no counter to radar.  But in real life, island dodging is a legit way to do it.

 

I can live with the fact their 1940s era radar somehow magically gives pinpoint accuracy on ships 9km away, and even magically uses advanced WI-FI to somehow relay that pinpoint accuracy to ships not even in radio line of communication (again, islands & mountains are big).  But really, why can't it be line of sight?

There seems to be an issue with adding line of sight checks to radar.

[WidochMeirker]

because the complexity of re-programming the consumable with the current game mechanics

 

I too wish for this to be fixed.

 

There seems to be an issue with adding line of sight checks to radar.

 

Thanks for the feedback guys.  I didn't realize there was a technical side to it.  I just assumed Wargaming wanted it to work the way it does.

[SgtSpud]

Currently the only way to "beat" radar is with knowledge. Knowing which ships have radar, their range and duration is key to success with DDs.

[TTK_Aegis]

Yup, as they said a few times in the past, it would take a revamp of core components to the game engine to allow for radar LOS. This is also apparently a big reason why no night battle scenarios have ever been explored, as search lights and light from star shells would be similarly unrealistic when it comes to cover. 

 

I'd assume, if they ever revamp the engine, you'd see LOS added to radar. They seem to agree that it's not how it should be, but it's how it has to be for now. 

[MrDeaf]

Yup, as they said a few times in the past, it would take a revamp of core components to the game engine to allow for radar LOS. This is also apparently a big reason why no night battle scenarios have ever been explored, as search lights and light from star shells would be similarly unrealistic when it comes to cover. 

 

I'd assume, if they ever revamp the engine, you'd see LOS added to radar. They seem to agree that it's not how it should be, but it's how it has to be for now. 

 

yeah, basically, WG's implementation of radar and hydro works "good enough" for them.

If it is "good enough", then any further development/fixes get pushed down to low priority.

 

I think WG's current top priority are CV fixes or something, because they haven't even bothered to nerf Khab yet, despite how much it overperforms.

[theLaalaa]

I know radar is in the game, for good or bad, and there's no way they are taking it out.

 

There is a way to remove radar from the game, but it makes you richer and tests your desire:

 

Play Tier 1 exclusively. Really.

• Nothing to buy, so you save your money.
• Take yourself OUT of higher tier play, thus the higher tiers suffer for lack of players, thus Wargaming makes inquiries and finds that the higher tiers will continue to suffer until satellite radar coverage is revamped to '40's standards or removed.

 

Sadly, few have the resolve to push through and endure for change they feel is needed. Wargaming listens when its game is no longer a draw, thus affecting its cash-flow. Whimpering in forums mollifies the plebs, but is of little to NO value in affecting change.

[Captain_Dorja]

 

There is a way to remove radar from the game, but it makes you richer and tests your desire:

 

Play Tier 1 exclusively. Really.

• Nothing to buy, so you save your money.
• Take yourself OUT of higher tier play, thus the higher tiers suffer for lack of players, thus Wargaming makes inquiries and finds that the higher tiers will continue to suffer until satellite radar coverage is revamped to '40's standards or removed.

 

Sadly, few have the resolve to push through and endure for change they feel is needed. Wargaming listens when its game is no longer a draw, thus affecting its cash-flow. Whimpering in forums mollifies the plebs, but is of little to NO value in affecting change.

 

I sense much butthurt in you. 

[theLaalaa]

I sense much butthurt in you. 

 

None... It's resolve you sense. Unusual, and thus prone to mis-interpretation in this age.

[SeaborneSumo]

As a developer for over 20 years, I'm calling [edited]on the 'complexity' argument.

 

Can you visually SEE a ship behind an island?  NO!! Then radar can have the same parameters attached so it can not SEE a ship behind an island.

 

The players wanted radar, so WG quickly and cheaply developed a radar consumable.  With little to no thought given to deep game impacts.  Remember, you don't 'purchase' radar with $$$.  So WG is fine with this horrible mechanic and has no desire to SPEND $$$ to fix it.  It gains them ($$) nothing in the end.

 

Unless players by the thousands start protesting and leaving the game over this issue they will not fix.  Again,,, it is NO different than visual mechanics.

 

 

[aethervox]

There seems to be an issue with adding line of sight checks to radar.

 

& the issue is ...  a screwed programme that WG is too cheap ( rather, too greedy) to fix properly. Just like a good number of things (especially in WoT)

[theLaalaa]

As a developer for over 20 years, I'm calling [edited]on the 'complexity' argument.

 

Can you visually SEE a ship behind an island?  NO!! Then radar can have the same parameters attached so it can not SEE a ship behind an island.

 

The players wanted radar, so WG quickly and cheaply developed a radar consumable.  With little to no thought given to deep game impacts.  Remember, you don't 'purchase' radar with $$$.  So WG is fine with this horrible mechanic and has no desire to SPEND $$$ to fix it.  It gains them ($$) nothing in the end.

 

Unless players by the thousands start protesting and leaving the game over this issue they will not fix.  Again,,, it is NO different than visual mechanics.

 

I was going to make this point as well, but the issue of affecting change was a greater priority in my post. Thank you for pointing out that LOS is ALREADY in the game, and radar should only expand on that dynamic.

[Carrier_Lexington]

Can you visually SEE a ship behind an island?  NO!! Then radar can have the same parameters attached so it can not SEE a ship behind an island.

I think the issue is that Radar was originally set in a game-engine way as expanding the assured detection range, which worked while only the USN cruisers had it. It allowed the developers to simplify how LoS works. But then the Germans and the Russians came, and... well...

[SeaborneSumo]

I think the issue is that Radar was originally set in a game-engine way as expanding the assured detection range, which worked while only the USN cruisers had it. It allowed the developers to simplify how LoS works. But then the Germans and the Russians came, and... well...

 

Assured LOS mechanics are also broken.  This was a cheap, easy development action for open water engagements.  No thought was given to real world or even map environments.   

 

If I have a mountain between me and another ship,,, I can't see the ship on the other side.  Unless I'm less than 2km (1 mile ) away, then I can magically see through the mountain.  Broken!!

 

[_Big_Lou_]

IMHO, the problem lies in the question itself.

 

Can a ship, hidden in smoke, accurately fire on the relayed position spotted from a friendly ship?

No.

Can sonar "see" around islands?

No.

Can radar "see" around islands?

No.

 

This is all about the quality of gameplay, not physics.

[theLaalaa]

This is a shameless advertisement for Tier 1 play...

 

Come play Tier 1. No reason to cry, until you find that many of the seals down here are, in fact, navy rather than baby!

 

This ends the shameless advertisement for Tier 1 play.

[Captain_Dorja]

 

None... It's resolve you sense. Unusual, and thus prone to mis-interpretation in this age.

 

Resolve is often required to maintain a proper temper tantrum. Without extreme force of will, it's impossible to maintain the front required to persist with a bad decision for a long time.

[theLaalaa]

Resolve is often required to maintain a proper temper tantrum. Without extreme force of will, it's impossible to maintain the front required to persist with a bad decision for a long time.

 

If you're implying I'm in a temper tantrum because I don't frequent the high-tier play (due to my dislike of the mechanics encountered), you're mistaken. You may believe it, though, if it helps you justify continuing to subsidize the company. Glad to provide a service for you.

[Herr_Reitz]

Kind of reminds you of what we used to call "invisi-fire" which got renamed to "Open Water Stealth Firing" because OWSF looked better than IF which was already assigned to an ammo commander skill - right? 

 

Was it not something like "we knew it was there but did not plan on it to grow as it did"? What really is the difference between Hydro and Radar? Range and seeing through islands. 

[chewonit]

Kind of reminds you of what we used to call "invisi-fire" which got renamed to "Open Water Stealth Firing" because OWSF looked better than IF which was already assigned to an ammo commander skill - right? 

 

Was it not something like "we knew it was there but did not plan on it to grow as it did"? What really is the difference between Hydro and Radar? Range and seeing through islands. 

 

Actually, both see through islands. The only true difference is radar doesn't detect torpedoes.

[surratus]

I think the answer is "balance".  Consider spotting, the accuracy of spotting mechanics in WoWS are just as questionable.  Or torpedo plotting - I've always wondered why all torpedoes on the map appear on my directional display as if they are headed directly towards me, regardless of my maneuvers?  If all I had to do was glace at the display to determine a torpedo heading it would be a big nerf to DD's if I could disregard all torps not on an intercepting path (and tell that maniac in my ear to quite shouting "torpedoes to port! when it's clear that I'm never going to catch up to them without warp technology).

 

Someday radar may work as physics requires.  Heck, physics is easy compared to balancing a global video game.  But, I think you can plan on radar LOS happening someday, as the folks at WG make changes so frequently that I wonder if they are paid by the byte.    

[Destroyer_KuroshioKai]

Currently the only way to "beat" radar is with knowledge. Knowing which ships have radar, their range and duration is key to success with DDs.

 

And limitations of the enemies ability to fire at spaces lots of caps have a safe space depending on enemy positions.  Even them most caps have some form of cover to exploit.