Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Emerald_Weapon

Minotaur & Atlanta Detectability Ranges

Is it normal?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it normal?

    • Yes
      14
    • No
      2

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
7 posts
4,571 battles

Is this normal for a larger ship to have a lower detectability range by sea than a smaller one? I just find it odd, unless I'm missing something.. By the way both ship captains have concealment expert skill.

 

 

Atlanta.png

Minotaur.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[WAIFU]
[WAIFU]
Members
351 posts
9,413 battles

Mino also has access to the 5th module slot that grants another 10% to concealment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
546
[WORX]
Members
1,892 posts
12,982 battles

IDK about anything that is normal in WOWS. Now

  • IF the ATL would be in the same tier as the Mino then the Mino would have the worst concealment of the two in tier 10.
  • IF the Mino was in tier 7 like the ATL, then the Mino's concealment would be about 9.7 which is still worst then the ATL at tier 7.

According to my uneducated guess, the ATL would win IF the Mino goes down to tier 7 or even if it goes (heaven forbids) up to tier 10. Remember WOWS is an arcade game although some parts are right, it will tweak other parts to suit the ship for its tier, cheers !

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
449
[-AA-]
Members
1,729 posts
6,657 battles
25 minutes ago, Muki41 said:

Mino also has access to the 5th module slot that grants another 10% to concealment

As Muki41 said.

Minotaur has a base concealment of 11.52 km.
Atlanta has a base concealment of 10.98 km.

So in this case the smaller ship has a smaller concealment. I believe it also has to do with the height of the ship anyway. Don't know whether WG is consistent with this or mainly focus on balance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
410
[WOLFB]
Members
1,742 posts
8,337 battles
1 hour ago, LemonadeWarrior said:



So in this case the smaller ship has a smaller concealment. I believe it also has to do with the height of the ship anyway. Don't know whether WG is consistent with this or mainly focus on balance. 

 

Conqueror would like to have a word with you :3 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,870
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,240 posts
14,670 battles

There are Battleships in this game that are stealthier than Cruisers.  Concealment is whatever WG wants it to be.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[CVA16]
Members
2,316 posts
9,901 battles
On 5/19/2018 at 12:29 PM, HazeGrayUnderway said:

There are Battleships in this game that are stealthier than Cruisers.  Concealment is whatever WG wants it to be.

True^^^ I think there is actually some sort of formula based on profile area from the side (surface) and from above (air) to calculate the concealment. Okhotnik has a very low profile (probably unseaworthy IRL) giving it a low surface concealment but a bigger air detection since it has a huge deck (compared to other DDs).  WG may use this as a basis but feels free to "adjust" the numbers according to their balancing whims. Same as they do with gun performance (dispersion, sigma, rof, shell damage, fire chance, penetration (why do some ships get 1/4 HE pen while the rule is 1/6))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,870
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,240 posts
14,670 battles
6 hours ago, Sabot_100 said:

True^^^ I think there is actually some sort of formula based on profile area from the side (surface) and from above (air) to calculate the concealment. Okhotnik has a very low profile (probably unseaworthy IRL) giving it a low surface concealment but a bigger air detection since it has a huge deck (compared to other DDs).  WG may use this as a basis but feels free to "adjust" the numbers according to their balancing whims. Same as they do with gun performance (dispersion, sigma, rof, shell damage, fire chance, penetration (why do some ships get 1/4 HE pen while the rule is 1/6))

When the game launched, there was more logic applied to concealment ranges.  It was like this for a long time.  The stealthiest BB for years was North Carolina, and she was the epitome of the Stealth Build BB.

 

Then the RN BBs came out.

Then Caesar came out.

Then Roma came out.

I expect the Italian BB Line will eventually have some Pasta Ninjas also.  The Italian ships we have in general feature stealth, even the BBs.  You can creep up in Caesar to about 12km of an unsuspecting Cruiser and unload.  They'll never know what hit them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,683 posts
7,756 battles
On 5/22/2018 at 5:52 PM, HazeGrayUnderway said:

When the game launched, there was more logic applied to concealment ranges.  It was like this for a long time.  The stealthiest BB for years was North Carolina, and she was the epitome of the Stealth Build BB.

 

Then the RN BBs came out.

Then Caesar came out.

Then Roma came out.

I expect the Italian BB Line will eventually have some Pasta Ninjas also.  The Italian ships we have in general feature stealth, even the BBs.  You can creep up in Caesar to about 12km of an unsuspecting Cruiser and unload.  They'll never know what hit them.

The NC is the WoWs equivalent of a Klingon Bird of Prey. You engage the cloaking device, decloak at 12 km and raise forward deflectors, then unload into your targets vulnerable nether regions. It’s armored enough and has good enough secondaries that it’s first surprise strike will give it enoughnadvantage to beat almost anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
288
[SCCC]
Members
705 posts
5,503 battles

This is arcade battles not realistic sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×