Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
MrPetticoat

Radar and other balance issues.Cont.

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles

Well here we are again.
Clearly as the only thread to get consistently locked, even when it generally has a civil discussion, are Radar threads... it is quite interesting.. Especially when it happens soon after the Dev Q&A hypocrisy is brought up.


Source  (Dev Q&A): https://thedailybounce.net/2018/04/17/world-of-warships-developers-qa/

 

The purpose of any forum is for Discussion. Discussion can include complaints, suggestions, PSA, and even debates formed from such. It seems our dear moderator is confused as to that purpose. It really doesn’t matter if “the devs have no current plans for changing radar”. It really doesn’t. These threads are created for the purpose of making sure they know the issue is simply not going to “go away”, and to create ideas on how to fix the problem. It doesn’t matter if you or anyone, agrees, or even disagrees that radar is a problem. The issue has already ascended from simply being solely a “radar” problem. Every time the discussion is silenced, you give it further ascension. It isn’t just radar, but now double standards, dev favoritism, and hypocrisy as well. Continue to silence it, and you can certainly add, “what are they trying to hide?” to that list.

Are you trying to tell us that NOTHING has ever went live in WoWs in a broken/unbalanced state? lol
I bet before X (something broken/unbalanced) went live/when X went live the developers had no “intention” or “planned” any changes for X until they were made aware, at the very least, that the community is not intent with said state.


Look we get it. Players that primarily play Battleships are your highest source of Income. We get it, Battleships are the most played ship type..again..and again.
Does that mean there should be a free pass for dev favoritism and double standards? Not if you want your game to thrive. You can only pump out so many BBs, premium and otherwise. Did you really think the short term cash made from appeasement is going to be anything more than a fraction in measurement to the sustainable income possible from making the game balanced? Don’t kid yourself.


So now that the rant is over, back to the topic(s) at hand.


Radar:
- Radar is a hard counter. The only one in the game. Either the game is Rock-Paper-Scissors, or it isn’t.
- Radar is game breaking. It ignores a basic game environment ruleset, LoS.
- Fixing Radar (LoS issue) is NOT a game engine limitation.
- Radar was added to the game based on zero supporting metrics, and dishonest publicly stated intentions.



So, no matter how much you disagree that WoWs is/isn’t Rock-Paper-Scissors. The latest Dev Q&A (linked above) openly admits that their supposed “intent” is and has always been for it to be Rock-Paper-Scissors when making balance decisions/changes. Well, for Rock-Paper-Scissors to be just that, it actually has to be a complete circle. Rock < Paper < Scissors < Rock < so on and so forth. The devs in that same Q&A also contradicted themselves when they admitted their intent to limit how many DDs are in each math but not the other ship types (CA/BB). You cannot limit an archetype and not the others in a Rock-Paper-Scissors environment. That is key. By limiting Rock…. You automatically make Scissors stronger, and as a chain reaction, make Paper weaker. If Rock is actually showing, through objective evidence as being overperforming, then Rock should be changed from within instead of limitations added. In this case, Rock is DDs, and there is no objective evidence showing them overperforming either. Next, you will also note that they claim that they have no intention of making MM changes based on Radar equipped ships, and that having radar (through statistics) shows nothing more than the normal 50/50 chance to win. Interesting how multiple users have dumped and compiled data that shows just the opposite (on here AND reddit). Clearly, the evidence shows having more Radar equipped ships on your team DOES, in fact, increase your win chance. It isn’t the choice not to change here that is the problem, it is the flat out lie about metrics. Again, it shouldn’t be limited that way (MM), Radar should be fixed from within.


“But without Radar, Destroyers kill everything unchallenged” “Cruisers cannot do anything do destroyers without Radar”, etc etc etc etc. <insert hyperbole here>

Wrong.
- Cruisers who still don’t have any radar do just fine in killing Destroyers, otherwise if any of that were true their statistics would show case such a disadvantage.
- Players on multiple venues (Twitch/YT) clearly show there are a plethora of avenues, absent radar, that cruisers have to hunt and take out cruisers. This is in the form of not only smart play, but even builds for your ship and captain.
- Before Radar, the evidence (server metrics) were showing cruisers in a bad shape. However, the evidence was also NOT showing destroyers in an overpowered state. Hmmmmm… how could that be? Oh yea. What it was showing is Battleships in a not only overpopulated state, but overpowered state. Interesting how that correlates with cruisers statistics showing a bad survival rate and their ability to effectively **Hunt ** or **Counter** Destroyers.


In my opinion here are the best Solutions:
(Not asking for the removal of Radar) (Pick one)

1.) Fix assured acquisition to adhere to LoS rules. We are talking 1 to 2 lines of code at most. This fixes radar LoS. Also fixes hydro LoS.

2.) Change Radar to ONLY reveal targets (on the HUD/Screen) for the user of Radar, and ONLY minimap for the user’s team.

3.) Copy/Paste the assured acquisition mechanic, rename it, and tie it to Radar instead. Add in LoS requirement.  (easy peezy)

4.) Give Destroyers a new consumable, or change an existing part of their armament to be an equally (rule breaking) hard counter against Battleships.



I personally think the ultimate solution is a combination of 1 + 4.
To achieve the best balance possible the following needs to happen:

- Radar needs to adhere to LoS rules.
- Destroyers need a hard counter, that isn’t rule breaking, specified for anti-BB use. Change the torps for all DDs above a certain tier to have the target restriction of Asashio DWT (BB and CV only) and buff some of their other attributes slightly to make up for this nerf. (buff speed and range a little respectively)
- Battleships need a large accuracy nerf, and an anti-fire buff.


Now you have Rock-Paper-Scissors. Now you eliminate the back-camp BB meta. Now Cruisers can ultimate hunt Destroyers without fear of 50%+ of their HP getting deleted from insane ranges, from single salvoes, well outside their own max weapon range. Now BBs have less fear of getting burned to death without losing fear of being torped, because they have to push up to actually do damage and get kills.


Balance.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,558
[SIM]
Members
3,757 posts
6,236 battles

So you hate battleships and radar. Couldn’t you have just said that? 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles
2 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

So you hate battleships and radar. Couldn’t you have just said that? 

I play all ship types, and have invested thousands in this game. No emotion conveyed in this thread, other than any that can begotten from disapproval for hypocrisy. There is an issue, me and others want to fix it... at the ROOT.  Simple as that.

I am sure you have enough intellect to make a better response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,914
[ARGSY]
Members
11,837 posts
7,540 battles
13 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

Well here we are again.

Indeed.

 

These "game-breaking" things keep getting put in, and people still manage to post insanely high levels of achievement in all types of ship regardless. So where does this leave your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles
Just now, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Indeed.

 

These "game-breaking" things keep getting put in, and people still manage to post insanely high levels of achievement in all types of ship regardless. So where does this leave your opinion?

Unfortunately, that statement does not even make sense, as in is composed of flawed reasoning. I would advise you correct that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,914
[ARGSY]
Members
11,837 posts
7,540 battles
1 minute ago, zarth12 said:

Unfortunately, that statement does not even make sense, as in is composed of flawed reasoning. I would advise you correct that.

I think you may be projecting here.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
702
[RST]
Members
1,850 posts
11,732 battles

You have a valid point. Every time I try to make the same point I get shut down or censored.

Radar is nothing more than a magical button that when pressed makes every ship's concealment obsolete for 25 to 40 seconds (depending on the CA). During this duration Radar has X-Ray vision and can see behind islands. Destroyers (especially IJN) Camo, CE skill, and CE equipment are ineffective, leaving these ships with they pants down and no way to defend themselves.
The entire point of including islands in the maps is so that ships can use them as part of their strategy and gameplay. 
If Radar used line of sight (this can easily be implemented), Destroyers should be able to use islands to defend themselves from detection. 

I keep hearing how the developers are unable to do this.  This is a farce because line of sight rules are used in other ways throughout the game.

Edited by STINKWEED_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
353
[H-W-C]
Members
1,271 posts
3,613 battles

Personally, if I had to change radar at all, I would go with either the "cone" proposal (only reveals ships in a cone in the direction your guns are pointing) or simply have increased dispersion when shooting at ships revealed only by radar, or just decreased range when working through islands (11.7km to 7-8km or something)

Making radar LOS will just make it almost useless on island heavy maps.

Edited by warpath_33
i can't grammar
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles
11 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I think you may be projecting here.

0/10. Would not feed again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,218
[SPTR]
Members
3,637 posts
6,548 battles

cfl8l52kgq801.gif

Allow me to kindly disagree.
It would be fair if you complained about the duration of radars, or about the deadliness of Battleships in general. But able to disregard LoS is what radar and hydro special. Cruisers like Moskva and Des Moines stands no chance in open water at medium to close range. If all radar does is to provide 25-1min of basically RPF it would really render these ships toothless. Henri and Zao does not have radar for good reason, they either have excellent speed to dodge salvos, or have trolly armor and good concealment, allowing them to recover from exposed positions while being partially effective in supporting friendly dds passively. Even with the current "broken" radar, getting into a position that allows Des Moines and Moskva to be both close enough to be effective and out of reach from bbs is already very hard and very risky. Being able to influence the cap contest is the one of the few reasons why Des Moines is special compared to other cruisers that is more survivable, deals more consistent damage, and overall deals more damage per game. 

One other important aspect of destroyer torpedoes is its deterrence to smoke firing. If you sat in a smoke for about a minute without any consideration of destroyer threat you deserve to eat a faceful of metal fishes IMO.

Battleships at high tiers are very dependent on their accuracy and consistency, because they are so terrible at pulling out of dangerous positions and recover from bad positioning. Against focused fire, or even just one cruiser sticking to the battleship, a battleship needs to kill the cruiser, and kills it fast. Or else the constant stress on damage control and damage repair consumable, plus the hard spotting from cruisers and fire concealment debuff can quickly create a crossfire that can suffocate any battleship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,581
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,461 posts
8,115 battles
31 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

- Before Radar, the evidence (server metrics) were showing cruisers in a bad shape. However, the evidence was also NOT showing destroyers in an overpowered state. Hmmmmm… how could that be? Oh yea. What it was showing is Battleships in a not only overpopulated state, but overpowered state. Interesting how that correlates with cruisers statistics showing a bad survival rate and their ability to effectively **Hunt ** or **Counter** Destroyers.

Really? 

Radar was introduced in two separate patches:

Soviet CAs 0.5.4 3/22/2016
USN Radar  0.5.4.1 3/29/2016

From the week of March 19, 2016 (less than a week before radar was introduced):

 2016/03/19     
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Shimakaze 622 51651
10 Gearing 245 19390
10 Khabarovsk 78 4919
    Total Games Played 75960
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Des Moines 225 14568
10 Zao 298 19920
10 Hindenburg 179 11271
  (No Moskva yet) Total Games Played 45759
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Yamato 457 29736
10 Montana 235 14749
    Total Games Played 44485

The Shimakaze alone accounts for more games played than any non DD class at tier 10 and accounts for almost 70% of DD games as well. The next two most played ships (Yamato, played almost 2/3 as much and Zao) where nerfed because they where OP (Super heal, HP pool, invisifire, turret traverse, etc).

 

The fact is that the Shima was played so much even Shima drivers wanted a change because not even torpedo boats like playing against torpedo boats. Even more this is the same for weeks before this as well, its not just an isolated incident. People say that the shima was never OP and they are right, it didnt out perform much in damage or kills but it sure as hell out performed in games played. 

 

So tell me, how does the Shima alone account for more battles played than all BBs combined and BBs are the one that are overpopulated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,170 posts
5,841 battles
8 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

0/10. Would not feed again.

Does this mean you'll stop posting?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,170 posts
5,841 battles
8 minutes ago, The_first_harbinger said:

cfl8l52kgq801.gif

Allow me to kindly disagree.
It would be fair if you complained about the duration of radars, or about the deadliness of Battleships in general. But able to disregard LoS is what radar and hydro special. Cruisers like Moskva and Des Moines stands no chance in open water at medium to close range. If all radar does is to provide 25-1min of basically RPF it would really render these ships toothless. Henri and Zao does not have radar for good reason, they either have excellent speed to dodge salvos, or have trolly armor and good concealment, allowing them to recover from exposed positions while being partially effective in supporting friendly dds passively. Even with the current "broken" radar, getting into a position that allows Des Moines and Moskva to be both close enough to be effective and out of reach from bbs is already very hard and very risky. Being able to influence the cap contest is the one of the few reasons why Des Moines is special compared to other cruisers that is more survivable, deals more consistent damage, and overall deals more damage per game. 

One other important aspect of destroyer torpedoes is its deterrence to smoke firing. If you sat in a smoke for about a minute without any consideration of destroyer threat you deserve to eat a faceful of metal fishes IMO.

Battleships at high tiers are very dependent on their accuracy and consistency, because they are so terrible at pulling out of dangerous positions and recover from bad positioning. Against focused fire, or even just one cruiser sticking to the battleship, a battleship needs to kill the cruiser, and kills it fast. Or else the constant stress on damage control and damage repair consumable, plus the hard spotting from cruisers and fire concealment debuff can quickly create a crossfire that can suffocate any battleship. 

You make good points.

I wonder if he's going to call your post out as a hotbed of fallacies, dismiss it as subjective, or accuse you of trolling and put you on ignore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,218
[SPTR]
Members
3,637 posts
6,548 battles
1 minute ago, Skpstr said:

You make good points.

I wonder if he's going to call your post out as a hotbed of fallacies, dismiss it as subjective, or accuse you of trolling and put you on ignore?

wait, is this the fallacyman?

facepalm-rage-face-i13.jpg

why would I bother...

Edited by The_first_harbinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,170 posts
5,841 battles
10 minutes ago, 1nv4d3rZ1m said:

Really? 

Radar was introduced in two separate patches:

Soviet CAs 0.5.4 3/22/2016
USN Radar  0.5.4.1 3/29/2016

From the week of March 19, 2016 (less than a week before radar was introduced):

 2016/03/19     
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Shimakaze 622 51651
10 Gearing 245 19390
10 Khabarovsk 78 4919
    Total Games Played 75960
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Des Moines 225 14568
10 Zao 298 19920
10 Hindenburg 179 11271
  (No Moskva yet) Total Games Played 45759
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Yamato 457 29736
10 Montana 235 14749
    Total Games Played 44485

The Shimakaze alone accounts for more games played than any non DD class at tier 10 and accounts for almost 70% of DD games as well. The next two most played ships (Yamato, played almost 2/3 as much and Zao) where nerfed because they where OP (Super heal, HP pool, invisifire, turret traverse, etc).

 

The fact is that the Shima was played so much even Shima drivers wanted a change because not even torpedo boats like playing against torpedo boats. Even more this is the same for weeks before this as well, its not just an isolated incident. People say that the shima was never OP and they are right, it didnt out perform much in damage or kills but it sure as hell out performed in games played. 

 

So tell me, how does the Shima alone account for more battles played than all BBs combined and BBs are the one that are overpopulated?

Time=wasted.

Better be careful Zim, you're practically begging for an ignore lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
Members
23,170 posts
5,841 battles
Just now, The_first_harbinger said:

wait, is this the fallacyman?

Yuppers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
835
[SIDE]
Members
2,376 posts
33 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

So you hate battleships and radar. Couldn’t you have just said that? 

Zarth hates the game period.  I’m convinced once the well of negative attention he drinks from on this forum dries up he will go troll another game.

Time wasted indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
835
[SIDE]
Members
2,376 posts
18 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

There is nothing wrong with Radar.

/thread

Radar = not broken. Work around it. The end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[KND]
[KND]
Members
47 posts
11,093 battles

Wait for the new Tech Tree from destroyers equipped with Radar. This day will come.

 

luyI9E.gif

 

Black is a prelude to what will come, as Lo Yang has been in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,581
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,461 posts
8,115 battles
1 minute ago, MidNiight said:

Wait for the new Tech Tree from destroyers equipped with Radar. This day will come

Black is a prelude to what will come, as Lo Yang has been in the past.

They are already here, the Pan Asian DDs can choose radar from tier 8 up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[KND]
[KND]
Members
47 posts
11,093 battles
1 minute ago, 1nv4d3rZ1m said:

Eles já estão aqui, os DDs Pan Asiáticos podem escolher o radar do nível 8 para cima.

Yes, but there will be destroyers with smoke and radar. That's what I think, being pessimistic. Someone at wargaming is crazy to do that. It's the guy who idealized the Belfast and Conqueror etc. hehehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles
47 minutes ago, 1nv4d3rZ1m said:

Really? 

Radar was introduced in two separate patches:

Soviet CAs 0.5.4 3/22/2016
USN Radar  0.5.4.1 3/29/2016

From the week of March 19, 2016 (less than a week before radar was introduced):

 2016/03/19     
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Shimakaze 622 51651
10 Gearing 245 19390
10 Khabarovsk 78 4919
    Total Games Played 75960
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Des Moines 225 14568
10 Zao 298 19920
10 Hindenburg 179 11271
  (No Moskva yet) Total Games Played 45759
       
Tier Ship Number of players Battles Played
10 Yamato 457 29736
10 Montana 235 14749
    Total Games Played 44485

The Shimakaze alone accounts for more games played than any non DD class at tier 10 and accounts for almost 70% of DD games as well. The next two most played ships (Yamato, played almost 2/3 as much and Zao) where nerfed because they where OP (Super heal, HP pool, invisifire, turret traverse, etc).

 

The fact is that the Shima was played so much even Shima drivers wanted a change because not even torpedo boats like playing against torpedo boats. Even more this is the same for weeks before this as well, its not just an isolated incident. People say that the shima was never OP and they are right, it didnt out perform much in damage or kills but it sure as hell out performed in games played. 

 

So tell me, how does the Shima alone account for more battles played than all BBs combined and BBs are the one that are overpopulated?

So you are just going to repeat the same data that anyone can edit and type? Is this another "Wargaming said this" argument? Interesting how the source of the data, as in *where* it was compiled is never cited by you.

Everyone knew Shima had the most games played out of all DDs before Radar was introduced, but BBs were still the highest pop. This is because Gearing was not only weak at that time, but the BB overpopulation demanded the most effective DD against them. Even cruisers were in such a bad shape that a large portion of cruisers players switched to BBs/Shima, and cruisers were in that bad shape because of the BB accuracy buff that had just occurred mere months before Radar was implemented, NOT because of DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,788 battles
57 minutes ago, warpath_33 said:

Personally, if I had to change radar at all, I would go with either the "cone" proposal (only reveals ships in a cone in the direction your guns are pointing) or simply have increased dispersion when shooting at ships revealed only by radar, or just decreased range when working through islands (11.7km to 7-8km or something)

Making radar LOS will just make it almost useless on island heavy maps.

it wouldn't be useless. Making it adhere to LoS is a necessity. It ignores a fundamental ruleset in the games environment. Imagine if Wargaming decided to make something ignore gravity.... or all laws of physics. Those are a part of the same group, all fundamental.

The amount of islands on a map plays no weight on that fact either. The Radar user cannot fire through mountains anyway, they rely on the teammates that it reveals the target for. There are also plenty of ships pre and post radar that do just fine adapting to island heavy maps absent radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×