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

Proximity Ammunitions

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,985
[PVE]
Members
3,816 posts
16,307 battles

I find it interesting that we now have Vietnam (1960's) accurate radar and I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

image.thumb.png.dc377aa341f9f3dadfa83113e2152839.png

Several varieties of proximity and VT were used in WW2 to great effect and since we now have modern radar, we should be able to spot Aircraft at launch and use proximity on them from out DP 5" guns or larger.  Proximity would increased the AA damage by 50%; increase the max ranges of AA/DP guns 4" and larger by 2 KM, and, would require same ship radar.

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar arrays....

When can we have this?

Your thoughts?

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,151 posts
14,358 battles
4 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

I find it interesting that we now have Vietnam (1960's) accurate radar and I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

image.thumb.png.dc377aa341f9f3dadfa83113e2152839.png

Several varieties of proximity and VT were used in WW2 to great effect and since we now have modern radar, we should be able to spot Aircraft at launch and use proximity on them from out DP 5" guns or larger.  Proximity would increased the AA damage by 50%; increase the max ranges of AA/DP guns 4" and larger by 2 KM, and, would require same ship radar.

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar arrays....

When can we have this?

Your thoughts?

We do have prox aa. Its from the dual 5" usn turret is one example i belive. Since shooting he at planes is kinda a waste

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,354
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,344 posts
13,879 battles
11 minutes ago, JessieTheKitty said:

We do have prox aa. Its from the dual 5" usn turret is one example i belive. Since shooting he at planes is kinda a waste

This and the US had proximity fuses in WWII which was one reason beyond the Japanese not having any pilots that attacking a US ship int 1944 - 1945 was suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,238
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,970 battles

Accurate radar data was also a thing during WW2, I can name numerous incidents where a ship accurately blind-fired a target. And that‘s not just for American ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
331
[A-CUP]
Members
890 posts
7,789 battles
16 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

I find it interesting that we now have Vietnam (1960's) accurate radar and I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

image.thumb.png.dc377aa341f9f3dadfa83113e2152839.png

Several varieties of proximity and VT were used in WW2 to great effect and since we now have modern radar, we should be able to spot Aircraft at launch and use proximity on them from out DP 5" guns or larger.  Proximity would increased the AA damage by 50%; increase the max ranges of AA/DP guns 4" and larger by 2 KM, and, would require same ship radar.

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar arrays....

When can we have this?

Your thoughts?

We already have something like this in the game. It's called "setting up your ship for AA".

You can actually increase your AA damage (for specifically guns that would be large enough to be radar directed) by 100% with Manual Fire Control skill, increase max range by up to 40%, and also increase AA DPS/reload rate by 10%. And you can use your secondaries (the exact same ones that would be radar directed toward aircraft) at the same time as using your AA.

I think we have the better deal.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,151 posts
14,358 battles
6 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

This and the US had proximity fuses in WWII which was one reason beyond the Japanese not having any pilots that attacking a US ship int 1944 - 1945 was suicide.

Im pretty sure MINO secondarys and or main turret is prox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
790
[HC]
Beta Testers
2,753 posts
12,319 battles

With how the game handles AA, it doesn't really matter. The effect of the proximity fuses would just be rolled into AA dps. AA doesn't have a hit chance, it just compares the DPS v/s the Hit points of the fighter, and comes up with a percent chance the squadron will lose an aircraft every second it's in the AA radius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,737
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,384 posts
681 battles
36 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

Because AA is a bubble DPS system. The AA guns aren't actually firing a shell that hits a plane. Plane enters AA aura and starts taking damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,238
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,970 battles
1 hour ago, ramp4ge said:

 

Because AA is a bubble DPS system. The AA guns aren't actually firing a shell that hits a plane. Plane enters AA aura and starts taking damage. 

Not 100% correct.

If you wanted to simplify the AA mechanics, you can imagine (for example) the heavy AA to "fire" every five seconds onto one target. All guns would concentrate onto one target, regardless of if they actually have a field of fire onto them. The game then calculates the chance that you kill the plane with that one salvo, kind of like if you manage a one-hit kill or not. If you don‘t kill the plane with that roll, then the plane is completely unaffected and has effectively taken no damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[VIP-2]
Members
814 posts
2,939 battles
2 hours ago, Asym_KS said:

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar ....

Your thoughts?

This is mimicked by HE, and secondary/AA guns are disabled, and work like proximity ammo, some disabling a syatem when the round actually never strikes the ship.

Although i kind of like the idea as a means to disable the radar, although it would have to be a fair amount of hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,609
[WOLF3]
Members
25,219 posts
22,240 battles

VT Fusing is *NOT* simulated in WoWS at all.

 

Only the US and possibly UK would have it.

 

*IF* VT Fuses were in WoWS, then the USN 127mm DP guns would have superior AA DPS than any of her peers, right?

 

North Carolina

127mm/38 Mk 32, 10x2 guns, 151 DPS.

 

Kii

100mm/65 Type 98, 8x2 guns, 166.4 DPS

 

VT fuses are in WoWS?  My a__ it is!

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,985
[PVE]
Members
3,816 posts
16,307 battles

The point is that AA fires are "timed HE": not Proximity.   Proximity also has a neat purpose against un-armored secondary gun crews (it kills them making the AA and secondary battery's ineffective) and it kills Radar.  And, close counts !!!

We have 1960's accurate radar, why not have an AA and ARM system that is even more efficient....

It would be a consumable and an Atlanta/Wooster would be an even worse AA nightmares.  Look, WG went and introduced a radar paradigm 25 years more advanced that WW2 and it is OP....  This would be a good AR munition since we don't have SLARM's to counter radar.   AND, proximity is "period correct" and even a lot more so that then RADAR scourge WG introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,842
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts
5 hours ago, Asym_KS said:

I find it interesting that we now have Vietnam (1960's) accurate radar and I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

image.thumb.png.dc377aa341f9f3dadfa83113e2152839.png

Several varieties of proximity and VT were used in WW2 to great effect and since we now have modern radar, we should be able to spot Aircraft at launch and use proximity on them from out DP 5" guns or larger.  Proximity would increased the AA damage by 50%; increase the max ranges of AA/DP guns 4" and larger by 2 KM, and, would require same ship radar.

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar arrays....

When can we have this?

Your thoughts?

ifGFfiI.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
246
[SS238]
Members
342 posts
32,327 battles

What is totally incorrect is Wargame's implementation of radar (and spotting in general). In 1945 there was no NTDS (Naval Tactical Data System) that allowed all the sensor data to be shared between ships of a task force.  In 1945, if in a night engagement (or any other type of restricted visibility) cruiser A detected a target on it's radar system, then cruiser A could track it and shoot at it. But that firing solution and exact target location/firing solution could NOT be passed to any other ship in the task force. The best that could happen was a TBS transmission "target bearing 175 range 18000 yards from cruiser A". The other ships gunnery control would have to do the rest of the work themselves.

Having one ship (a destroyer, a radar equipped cruiser, or whatever) spotting an enemy ship, and having that ship suddenly revealed to the entire fleet in such detail that it can be targeted and fired at by ANY ship up to it's maximum range is the greatest error in this game. It creates situations that should not exist and causes most of the problems we see, such as BB camping, DD's being deleted from across the map and so forth.

The spotting rules and displays need a major rework, if this game is to progress to a really great game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[GRETA]
[GRETA]
Members
580 posts
16,750 battles
10 hours ago, Asym_KS said:

I find it interesting that we now have Vietnam (1960's) accurate radar and I'm curious why WG hasn't implemented proximity anti-aircraft ammunition's.

 

image.thumb.png.dc377aa341f9f3dadfa83113e2152839.png

Several varieties of proximity and VT were used in WW2 to great effect and since we now have modern radar, we should be able to spot Aircraft at launch and use proximity on them from out DP 5" guns or larger.  Proximity would increased the AA damage by 50%; increase the max ranges of AA/DP guns 4" and larger by 2 KM, and, would require same ship radar.

Proximity was also used against ships to remove secondary gunners and communications/radar arrays....

When can we have this?

Your thoughts?

You're right, we totally need more ways to nerf carriers into oblivion.

It is cool and exciting to bring new weaponry based on real life counterparts into the game. The question is, will it break the current game balance? Does it involve major reworks of the current damage system? Does it force certain ships to play a certain way that isn't fun to the players involved?

The goal of adding the radar consumable into the game was to introduce counter-play against long range torpedo spam. Eventually, the game became overgrown with radar-equipped ships. The end result was that radar replaced torpedoes as the #1 annoying element in playing high tier games. And now, WG hints at adding a counter consumable to radar. :fish_palm:

The game has enough gimmicks as it is. This goes for VT fuse, Japanese type 3 shells, manual secondary control (not the 4 pt skill), gyroscopic torpedoes, and everyone's favorite, submarines.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,102
[CHASE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,960 posts
12,425 battles
19 minutes ago, AbyssAngkor said:

You're right, we totally need more ways to nerf carriers into oblivion.

It is cool and exciting to bring new weaponry based on real life counterparts into the game. The question is, will it break the current game balance? Does it involve major reworks of the current damage system? Does it force certain ships to play a certain way that isn't fun to the players involved?

The goal of adding the radar consumable into the game was to introduce counter-play against long range torpedo spam. Eventually, the game became overgrown with radar-equipped ships. The end result was that radar replaced torpedoes as the #1 annoying element in playing high tier games. And now, WG hints at adding a counter consumable to radar. :fish_palm:

The game has enough gimmicks as it is. This goes for VT fuse, Japanese type 3 shells, manual secondary control (not the 4 pt skill), gyroscopic torpedoes, and everyone's favorite, submarines.

 

 

He's going to use radar as an argument to defend this sh*t post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,985
[PVE]
Members
3,816 posts
16,307 battles
4 hours ago, AbyssAngkor said:

You're right, we totally need more ways to nerf carriers into oblivion.

It is cool and exciting to bring new weaponry based on real life counterparts into the game. The question is, will it break the current game balance? Does it involve major reworks of the current damage system? Does it force certain ships to play a certain way that isn't fun to the players involved?

The goal of adding the radar consumable into the game was to introduce counter-play against long range torpedo spam. Eventually, the game became overgrown with radar-equipped ships. The end result was that radar replaced torpedoes as the #1 annoying element in playing high tier games. And now, WG hints at adding a counter consumable to radar. :fish_palm:

The game has enough gimmicks as it is. This goes for VT fuse, Japanese type 3 shells, manual secondary control (not the 4 pt skill), gyroscopic torpedoes, and everyone's favorite, submarines.

 

First off radar was a sale gimmick but, more importantly, radar is a marketing test to measure the communities response to modern technology to increase the game's timeline into the 1950's....or even, the early 1960's.

To those whom negatively comment, that is un called for.  We are here to discuss, not insult.  Just say I disagree and go away....  Many of us like the game and seriously want to have alternative discussions.

We went from Coal, to oil, to gas, to nuclear propulsion in less that 75 years.....  We went from Black Powder, to smokeless propellant,  to Electrical propellant technology, and lasers in that same timeline.

Radar is a disruptive technology.  Proximity fuses were a disruptive technology that lead to all sorts of smart weapons.  If, we say Radar is OK, then logically, Proximity is OK.  (same era, same increase in accuracy that involved no actual human skill to use...)

 Submarines are the same way and go back to the 18th century in actual combat use !   

Radar has changed DD play until WG decides to put the 1960's radar away and replace it with 1940's radar.  Proximity would absolutely eliminate IJN CV's.  Of course, they are already being side-lined because of more and more CL's......  And you wonder why AA and radar aren't tied together????  Ever wonder why there isn't a CPT skill that does just that for CL CPT's??  

The point of this post is where does the community draw the line?  Do we want Iron and Steel analogue ships or do we want a time shift into the Nuclear and Information era ships?  I would favor the old school era because there are enough games that deal in the modern era and to be honest, they are seriously boring sometime.... and skill, isn't you.....skill in them, is in using everything else, because once you hit the missile button, Mr. Missile isn't yours to command....you don't aim it in a vast number of missiles available (but, not all...)  So, how would you call those games FPS's???  You aren't acutely controlling the aim..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×