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

Why is radar a binary vision consumable?

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

307
[-S-R-]
Beta Testers
531 posts
3,150 battles

So I don't play this game a ton, but it's been improved over time and I feel it's in a much better place today.  In keeping with that theme, I admit that I rarely keep up with the weekly news here, but I do come back every six months or so to see what's going on and read all the big email announcements.

It looks like there's been drama lately involving radar from the Russian DD change to the cruiser line causing radar spam.

It seems to me that radar is basically proliferated enough now where it's starting to look like it's in the same degenerate place where stealth firing and smoke were not too long ago.  That is, it's a binary "F U".  If you get hit with it, you usually just get burned down and there's little to respond with.  You are playing CDs rather than the ships, so many combats seem to come down to the supremacy of binary vision cooldowns.  If you pop it and the enemy gets lit, +1.  If not -1.

So the question I have is why are all these components so binary?  They're generally short ranged, death trap cooldowns that all of a sudden win or fail spectacularly.

Radar varies in accuracy and purpose, but in the real world it never let's you visually "see" the target, just identify it is there.  As an aside, smoke can obscure a ship, sure, but where's the inconsistency, the wind, the fact that you're being spotted by multiple ships or the black smoke from a stack trailing out?  The WoT binary render vision engine just does not serve a game of this scale well.

So why doesn't radar just do what it, you know, actually does?  For instance, have ships with radar have a reasonably long scan range, say at high tiers you "see" a BB at 20km out.  Obviously, radar is still affected by LoS to a degree, but when a ship of particular cross section hits its max "radar detection range" it gets picked up.  Maybe once every 10 seconds your sweep pings an overly large and ungainly broad enemy-colored blob on the screen indicating a contact with no further information.  As you get closer within range, the blob tightens to the actual silhouette of a ship, to the point that you can identify type.  Eventually you'll get a tight enough blob to ID the class of the ship and its rough orientation until it's spotted visually and it renders completely.  Then you can have the consumable just increase range, scan resolution or sweep time, etc.

You could give all the ships that had it radar which facilitates strategic visibility and then the special ships really focused cooldowns.  Maybe some DDs would have extra long range to scan for rough positional info on enemy CVs not behind an island.  Some CA/CL might have DD killing high speed scan CDs that let them hunt them down by constant position updates.  Missouri probably would have a high resolution CD allowing better out of visual fire against enemy BBs, albeit likely not enough at extreme ranges to reliably hit, mostly just harass or finish off.  Despite that, the even playing field with general radar would allow people to respond to attackers with CD advantage, only at a disadvantage instead of not at all.  It also opens up strategic opportunities like driving multiple CLs together tightly in clumps to show up as multiple BB sized blobs, causing the enemy to risk deploying improperly if they don't take care to ensure ID.

Anyway just a rambling idea at this point.  The pop-in, pop-out vision is just so jarring.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
444
[YAN]
Members
1,648 posts
7,944 battles

Grozovoi doest need or want radar, but I don't really think radar is a game issue per say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
455
[-AA-]
Members
1,756 posts
6,674 battles

I am not fine with radar going through islands. Lazy cruisers and too much magic, but the BB AP vs DD nerf will make a bit up for this I guess.

I am fine with the way it works, besides that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,375
Members
3,254 posts
9,538 battles
1 hour ago, FlakKnight said:

So the question I have is why are all these components so binary?  They're generally short ranged, death trap cooldowns that all of a sudden win or fail spectacularly.

Let me walk you through the logic:

Classes

  • BBs are slow armored ships with lots of HP and high detection.
  • CAs are faster less-armored ships that are more maneuverable with medium detection.
  • DDs are the fastest most-maneuverable with the lowest detection.

All ships have ranged attacks. (there are no "melee" ships. Even secondaries are ranged)

There is no "crowd control" in the game. In other words, you can't grapple, tackle, stun, snare, root, etc to restrict movement. (There also aren't any debuffs)

The problem: How do you stop DDs just running away from CAs and BBs? You can't.

Now, I bet the original plan was that the fastest class in the game (DDs) would be countered by the 4th class in the game, Carriers. This makes sense since CV planes can move much faster than DDs and can both attack and spot. (but CVs are a rare and endangered species)

If this was an MMO/MOBA, cruisers would have some kind of root or snare to slow down DDs, but that wouldn't make much sense in WoWs setting. (However, it does make sense in Total War: Arena, another WG game)

So you're stuck with the problem of having a ship class that can always choose when and where to engage in combat. Meaning, if that ship just wants to run away, BBs and CAs are unable to hunt it down and kill it. 

The real question: Why do BBs and CAs need to be able to hunt down and kill DDs?

DD players say there is no reason because DDs are countered by other DDs, and generally have to be really skilled/lucky to live through the initial battle chaos to even be alive to choose when to engage, and aren't over-the-top effective when they ARE able to do it. Risk > Reward.

BB/CA players will say that a DD could sit outside of detection range and toss torps all day long and there is nothing they can do except dodge torps. (easy if you're paying attention, hard if you've got lots of other threats happening)

Wargaming agrees with the BB/CA players that it's a problem that DDs, (through low detection and high speed) can choose when and where to engage if there are no other DDs (or CVs) around to help hunt them down.

If you follow that logic, than one of the only solutions to a problem where the fastest and least detectable class needs to be countered, and you can't resort to any form movement restriction, is to introduce: Alpha Strike

Alpha strike is a huge amount of upfront damage that can cripple or kill a target. Without an alpha strike, a DD will just speed back out of detection range and escape, allowing them to go back to choosing when and where to engage. Even escaping with 1 HP left is enough for a DD to regain complete battle initiative.

WG's Solution: Radar is intended to be an alpha strike vs DDs.

It makes perfect sense. It's binary. It affects all enemy ships equally, regardless of speed or detectability. It goes through islands, not by accident, but intentionally. It's why no amount of debate regarding DD performance will convince WG to change their mind about radar to make it more balanced. It's not intended to be balanced. It's intended to alpha strike DDs, which is the only way to prevent them from choosing when and where to engage. It's intended to be an insta-kill in most, if not all, situations.

So, yes. They could make it less effective, in any number of ways, for it to be balanced. But that's not the goal. Any balance would negate the whole reason it was put in. It needs to alpha strike to stop DDs from choosing when and where to attack, because many people believe it's a fundamental design flaw if CA/BBs cannot hunt down and kill DDs. 

Edited by Lensar
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,866 posts
5,799 battles

Two answers this is not Real Life. and the programming to do what you want would be staggering if it was possible in the game engine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[STAR]
Members
3,295 posts
8,120 battles

Radar is binary because concealment is binary, you are either spotted ir not spotted. So any mechanic that deals with concealment is binary as well, they will either spot you or not. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
198 posts
1,447 battles
3 hours ago, Xlap said:

Radar is binary because concealment is binary, you are either spotted ir not spotted. So any mechanic that deals with concealment is binary as well, they will either spot you or not. 

 

Again you left out the bit about radar and sonar working through islands while spotting doesn't unless you are within minimum detection range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
5 hours ago, Xlap said:

Radar is binary because concealment is binary, you are either spotted ir not spotted. So any mechanic that deals with concealment is binary as well, they will either spot you or not. 

 

A.) Concealment is not binary. You can be spotted on minimap but not on HUD. You can be spotted on both. You can be unspotted. You can be spotted to a friendly on the HUD, but not to someone else .just as You can be spotted by ALL on the HUD.

B.) Radar going through islands is game breaking and solidifies it as the only hard counter in the game. If it continues as such, demanding equally powerful hard counters (to BBs) are given to the DD arsenal, is 100% justified.

Edited by zarth12
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[STAR]
Members
3,295 posts
8,120 battles
1 hour ago, zarth12 said:

A.) Concealment is not binary. You can be spotted on minimap but not on HUD. You can be spotted on both. You can be unspotted. You can be spotted to a friendly on the HUD, but not to someone else .just as You can be spotted by ALL on the HUD.

Yep it is, the concealment mechanics is binary, you are either spotted or not. You are talking about spotting range limitation. But even then someone/something is spotting that ship. 

 

1 hour ago, zarth12 said:

B.) Radar going through islands is game breaking and solidifies it as the only hard counter in the game. If it continues as such, demanding equally powerful hard counters (to BBs) are given to the DD arsenal, is 100% justified.

Radar is a hard counter to concealment, not to DDs, cruisers, BBs ans even CVs   are afected by radar aswell. Its not hard codded to target DDs only. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
1 hour ago, Xlap said:

Yep it is, the concealment mechanics is binary, you are either spotted or not. You are talking about spotting range limitation. But even then someone/something is spotting that ship. 

 

Radar is a hard counter to concealment, not to DDs, cruisers, BBs ans even CVs   are afected by radar aswell. Its not hard codded to target DDs only. 

 

 

Incorrect. If Concealment was Binary, you would either be spotted or not, but that is not how it works in game. As again, you can be *Spotted* on the minimap, but not on the HUD. This can be caused by LoS, or even weather. You can be spotted on the minimap and HUD to one player but no one else, and even a spectrum of that. This can be due to LoS, or even weather. You can be spotted to an entire team on the minimap and HUD.

Please learn terminology, like Binary, before you use it.


Secondly, Radar is a hard counter to concealment. Concealment is the primary survival tool of DDs. Just as armor and EHP is for Battleships. Yes the other ship types CAN utilize concealment but it is NOT their primary survival tool. Ergo, it is a hard counter to DDs. Thus supporting it's very existence in the current iteration as a hard counter, one must also support the equivalent hard counters be added standard to complete the balance circle.

Edited by zarth12
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[STAR]
Members
3,295 posts
8,120 battles
1 hour ago, zarth12 said:

Incorrect. If Concealment was Binary, you would either be spotted or not, but that is not how it works in game. As again, you can be *Spotted* on the minimap, but not on the HUD. This can be caused by LoS, or even weather. You can be spotted on the minimap and HUD to one player but no one else, and even a spectrum of that. This can be due to LoS, or even weather. You can be spotted to an entire team on the minimap and HUD.

The ship is outside your spotting range, so you are not spotting the enemy ship, its appers on the minimal because someone is spotting the enemy. If you get closer and the ship gera inside you spot range you will see the enemy ship. You are confusing variantes with limits. 

 

A example, a Yamato vs a Z-52:

Of the z52 in under 6,1 km from the Yamato in open waters he WILL be spotted. If he is inside smoke he WONT be spotted. If the Yamato is inside the gun bloom and z-52 is firing he WILL be spotted, if the Z52 is behind a island he WONT be spotted, if Z52 is under 2,5km he WILL be spotted.  If z52 is over 6,1 km he WONT be spotted, if Z52 is over 6,1 km but fires his guns he WILL be spotted. The outcome is always spotted or not spotted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[STAR]
Members
3,295 posts
8,120 battles
1 hour ago, zarth12 said:

Secondly, Radar is a hard counter to concealment. Concealment is the primary survival tool of DDs. Just as armor and EHP is for Battleships. Yes the other ship types CAN utilize concealment but it is NOT their primary survival tool. Ergo, it is a hard counter to DDs. Thus supporting it's very existence in the current iteration as a hard counter, one must also support the equivalent hard counters be added standard to complete the balance circle.

Concealment os the main survival tool of some DDs, not all. And even then DDs have other survival tools like high mobility and small size. Concealment os also the main survival tool of some cruisers. 

 

Once again, radar is a hard conter to concealment, all ships that use concealment as a tool are/might be affected by radar. Some DDs dont care about concealment, some care but not too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,800
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,111 posts
7,576 battles
2 hours ago, zarth12 said:

Incorrect. If Concealment was Binary, you would either be spotted or not, but that is not how it works in game

That's exactly how it works in the game, actually. You're confusing drawing range with spotting.

And concealment HAS to be binary. If concealment was partial in vanilla client, I can guarantee that there would be mods that would make it full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,375
Members
3,254 posts
9,538 battles
2 hours ago, vak_ said:

That's exactly how it works in the game, actually. You're confusing drawing range with spotting.

And concealment HAS to be binary. If concealment was partial in vanilla client, I can guarantee that there would be mods that would make it full.

People are getting hung up on semantics of binary.

Concealment and detection can be mitigated by any number of ways.

Concealment: Ship detection ranges, proximity to other ships, CV planes, spotter planes, hydro, gun bloom.

Detection: Smoke, line of sight, weather conditions.

Radar cannot be mitigated in anyway at all. If you're in range when it's on, you're revealed. No matter what. Weather doesn't matter, your detection rate is moot, smoke doesn't help, line of sight doesn't help, nothing affects it or changes it. There is no consumable you can fire to mitigate it, no module you can load.

That's what people mean when they say it's a binary hard counter with no counter-play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
12 hours ago, Xlap said:

The ship is outside your spotting range, so you are not spotting the enemy ship, its appers on the minimal because someone is spotting the enemy. If you get closer and the ship gera inside you spot range you will see the enemy ship. You are confusing variantes with limits. 

 

A example, a Yamato vs a Z-52:

Of the z52 in under 6,1 km from the Yamato in open waters he WILL be spotted. If he is inside smoke he WONT be spotted. If the Yamato is inside the gun bloom and z-52 is firing he WILL be spotted, if the Z52 is behind a island he WONT be spotted, if Z52 is under 2,5km he WILL be spotted.  If z52 is over 6,1 km he WONT be spotted, if Z52 is over 6,1 km but fires his guns he WILL be spotted. The outcome is always spotted or not spotted. 

You clearly are confused. I know how Concealment works.

The claim was that concealment is binary. You were refuted on that claim.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
12 hours ago, Xlap said:

Concealment os the main survival tool of some DDs, not all. And even then DDs have other survival tools like high mobility and small size. Concealment os also the main survival tool of some cruisers. 

 

Once again, radar is a hard conter to concealment, all ships that use concealment as a tool are/might be affected by radar. Some DDs dont care about concealment, some care but not too much.

Nice logical fallacy.

Concealment is the main survival of ALL DDs, except one. An outlier. Point?

Mobility and Size are moot and their power subjective. They are not hard coded values that attribute a dice roll for hit/miss like some old RPG. I could be in my Henry, and shooting at a Yue Yang, or I could be shooting at Moskva. Their size is more relevant to my ability to aim, even more so then the limitations of even my own ship and their size. Where-as a hard coded value, like HP/EHP, it doesn't matter how skilled either party is. If you are hit at X angle you will lose the same amount of HP independent of either user's skill as would anyone in the same scenario at X angle with the same ships hit in the same spot.. Same with armor. Concealment is not the main survival tool of cruisers. Cruisers are a Jack of all trades when it comes to survivability. Some might utilize concealment more than others, but they all still utilize around the same *effective* concealment given their maximum *effective* weapon range.

You can commit proof by assertion s much as you want. It does not effect me. Radar is a hard counter to concealment. DDs are the only ship type with Concealment as the primary survival tool.
Radar is akin to having an armor and max HP debuff that ignores LoS.
So supporting Radar in it's current iteration is the same as supporting that the RPS circle should be completed, and DDs should get an equally powerful anti-BB tool added to their arsenal. Otherwise, See: Hypocrite.

Edited by zarth12
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,795
Alpha Tester
7,113 posts
3,722 battles

All I hear is:

*tears* "It's not fair that I have to use my minimap and basic awareness! I want to be able to spot and stealth torpedo my counter to death with 0 repercussions!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
2 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

All I hear is:

*tears* "It's not fair that I have to use my minimap and basic awareness! I want to be able to spot and stealth torpedo my counter to death with 0 repercussions!"

Nice passive aggressive deflect, Straw Man, and Hyperbole.

No-one here is asking for that. We are asking for a standard. Supporting Radar, in it's current iteration, without supporting equal rule-breaking hard counters added to complete the circle is textbook double-standards.

I can easily make the same quip about cruisers.
There are cruisers that do not have Radar that have perfectly fine stats. Interesting how people have no problem proclaiming that Hindy is the strongest cruiser, so do the devs. A cruiser without Radar. Seems to do just fine. It's existence must not be all that necessary.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,375
Members
3,254 posts
9,538 battles
23 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

All I hear is:

*tears* "It's not fair that I have to use my minimap and basic awareness! I want to be able to spot and stealth torpedo my counter to death with 0 repercussions!"

All I hear is: I have nothing intelligent to add, please add me to your ignore list.

Fine, done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,576
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,267 posts
12,617 battles

The reason why, is the lazy coding that WG used.  There is a range value in the code where detection is automatic, regardless of LOS.  RADAR boosts this minimum range detection value to the maximum of the RADAR's range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,559 battles
32 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

The reason why, is the lazy coding that WG used.  There is a range value in the code where detection is automatic, regardless of LOS.  RADAR boosts this minimum range detection value to the maximum of the RADAR's range.

That is putting it lightly.

Making Radar, even independent from assured acquisition, adhering to LoS rules is  a one liner and maybe a copy+paste. Modders for this game could do it in a heartbeat if given access.

Edited by zarth12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×