Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Phineas_2018

Bad ship sighting

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

8
[-AFK-]
Members
5 posts
10,905 battles

WOW needs to fix ship spotting. When you can't see a ship within shouting distance it's just plain bad graphic generation by the servers. Saying it is because another ship has it spotted and is why you don't is poor excuse for inability of servers not having enough capacity. All ships that spot a ship should see it, Not just ones targeting them. Being shot at by ships you can't see in open seas with no smoke screen or island to hide behind is a failure of graphic generating abilities of game. Can't say it's because ship is over horizon either with how close these "invisible' ships are.

  • Confused 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SuperTest Coordinator, Beta Testers
6,673 posts
12,154 battles

 

It has nothing to do with graphics and everything to do with a ship's innate detection range. This Smaland, for example, can only be seen by other ships within 6.1km unless it fires, after which it can be seen up to 11.4km away. Radar bypasses this restriction.

image.thumb.png.35c0d3d1a007eaa5c1c3e955de7302a4.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,591
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
28,894 posts
25,145 battles
5 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Detection

Why do people always assume it's hacking/game bug before they think it might be their own inexperience?

Understanding Spotting Mechanics is the first hurdle in getting better in this game.  If one doesn't get a grasp of that as early as possible, you'll always be confused by what you see.  Even worse, people will leverage that against you.  It's like playing contact sports with a broken leg.  You're nowhere near 100% and you're going to get f--ked up.  Harder.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,136
[TDRB]
Members
5,162 posts
13,743 battles
8 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Spotting Mechanics, my man.

 

7 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Detection

Why do people always assume it's hacking/game bug before they think it might be their own inexperience?

 

45 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

At 9K battles you should know how spotting works by now.  The servers are not the issue.

You may have been too quick to condemn. The OP sited a specific situation where in close proximity the ship he was not seeing was spotted by other ships. This game does not always play as advertised. There are glitches, connection problem, etc.

With over 9k battles the odds this is some noob who has yet to grasp the mechanics of spotting it very unlikely. By the OP stating other ships had the ship in question spotted gives an indication he understand the spotting mechanic. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,170
[WOLFC]
Members
2,221 posts
10,570 battles
11 hours ago, Phineas_2018 said:

Saying it is because another ship has it spotted and is why you don't is poor excuse for inability of servers not having enough capacity. All ships that spot a ship should see it, Not just ones targeting them.

This doesn’t make any sense. If a ship is spotted by any of your allies, it is visible to you, with the notable exception of the first 6 seconds of radar, during which the detected ship is only visible to the ship with radar. The other exception involves the fact that every ship has a distance at which detected ships render, which roughly represents the distance of the horizon (how far a ship’s lookout can see) in reality (although it is much less in game.) It roughly scales with concealment/mast height, so the distance is greater for BBs than DDs, for example. However, this only applies to distant ships, not those within “shouting distance.”

11 hours ago, Phineas_2018 said:

Being shot at by ships you can't see in open seas with no smoke screen or island to hide behind is a failure of graphic generating abilities of game.

This also doesn’t make sense in 99% of situations, with two important exceptions (one of which really isn’t, since it does involve cover).

1) A kiting ship firing at you from beyond its firing range can still hit you. It is more difficult without the dispersion buff and aim assist from locking on, but it’s possible. If there aren’t any ships within their main battery range when they fire their guns, they wont be detected.

2) Detection is determined by LOS of part of the ship that is located amidships. It’s possible to park a ship in a way that the bow or stern turrets are able to fire around an obstruction but still remain undetected. However, spotting works based on the same point, so this ship would need a teammate to spot for them in this instance.

Spotting mechanics are a very crucial part of the game to understand and use to your advantage. There is a reason (justified or not), that so many players complain about CV spotting.

Edited by Nevermore135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,005
Members
5,526 posts
10,688 battles
4 hours ago, kgh52 said:

 

 

You may have been too quick to condemn. The OP sited a specific situation where in close proximity the ship he was not seeing was spotted by other ships. This game does not always play as advertised. There are glitches, connection problem, etc.

With over 9k battles the odds this is some noob who has yet to grasp the mechanics of spotting it very unlikely. By the OP stating other ships had the ship in question spotted gives an indication he understand the spotting mechanic. 

The OP is making a MASSIVE assumption that the server graphic rendering is an issue since the server doe snot render any graphics for the game.  Bad connections and packetloss will generally also have several other issues not related to graphics.  The game is not a simulation and I wish I could say that all players with 3500 games have a good idea of the mechanics but from reading the forums any given day - you see that is not the case for a lot of people.  Just the other day a person with more than 20K games I believe stated an issue that really could not happen, provided no replay (because it was not 'needed'),  didn't know they were automatic, and essentially demanded the Devs fix the issue...  because it could only be a game issue.

So yea - I put NOTHING past the general player population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,136
[TDRB]
Members
5,162 posts
13,743 battles
3 hours ago, CylonRed said:

The OP is making a MASSIVE assumption that the server graphic rendering is an issue since the server doe snot render any graphics for the game.  Bad connections and packetloss will generally also have several other issues not related to graphics.  The game is not a simulation and I wish I could say that all players with 3500 games have a good idea of the mechanics but from reading the forums any given day - you see that is not the case for a lot of people.  Just the other day a person with more than 20K games I believe stated an issue that really could not happen, provided no replay (because it was not 'needed'),  didn't know they were automatic, and essentially demanded the Devs fix the issue...  because it could only be a game issue.

So yea - I put NOTHING past the general player population.

Yes, the OP is making an assumption the issue was due to an err in the graphics. Several made the assumption the OP did not understand the OP understood concealment mechanics. With over 9k battles the odds are more in favor of the OP & those accusing him of not understand conceal mechanics being wrong.

I find many post are made out of frustration. The more frustrated a person is the less likelihood of the complaint being rational. 

I doubt if many playing this game know the workings of the computer & the internet. They turn it on & hope it works. If they have an issue they blame something they've heard others complain about.

Wasn't IPcop that used the catch phrase "the bad packet stops here"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,899 posts
14,048 battles
9 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

Yes, the OP is making an assumption the issue was due to an err in the graphics. Several made the assumption the OP did not understand the OP understood concealment mechanics. With over 9k battles the odds are more in favor of the OP & those accusing him of not understand conceal mechanics being wrong.

I find many post are made out of frustration. The more frustrated a person is the less likelihood of the complaint being rational. 

I doubt if many playing this game know the workings of the computer & the internet. They turn it on & hope it works. If they have an issue they blame something they've heard others complain about.

Wasn't IPcop that used the catch phrase "the bad packet stops here"?

It's impossible to tell, OP provided no example. No replay, no screen shot. Based off his performance, it's most likely he doesnt understand the game very well. So not understanding concealment is a possibility. Maybe it is a tech issue, but again he provided nothing substantial. All we are left with is guessing. 

edit: for all we know, it may of just been a cyclone game

Edited by Rollingonit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,554
[SALVO]
Members
2,725 posts
6,816 battles
12 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

Several made the assumption the OP did not understand the OP understood concealment mechanics. With over 9k battles the odds are more in favor of the OP & those accusing him of not understand conceal mechanics being wrong.

Then If you take it that one step further and examine the account more closely there is a real good chance here that despite the 9k battles OP doesn't show a great understanding of the game.  If alone for the fact that he hardly ever plays it now. 

 

12 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

The more frustrated a person is the less likelihood of the complaint being rational. 

Agreed this seems to be the case here. 

 

12 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

I doubt if many playing this game know the workings of the computer & the internet. They turn it on & hope it works. If they have an issue they blame something they've heard others complain about.

Wasn't IPcop that used the catch phrase "the bad packet stops here"?

All of this supposes that it was the internet which is at fault here.  Yet there has not ever been a recorded incident from a reliable source that proves  that internet packet loss caused a ship not to be visible.  WoWs  has infact proven over and over not to be ping and packet depended. After download its one of the only games out there which one could still conceivably play on a 56k connection.   

WoWs handles  packet loss by stuttering and dropping connections all together after a time out period,  NOT by making ships appear out of nowhere. 

However EVERY SINGLE TIME , this invisible ship popping up out of nowhere , scenario pops up  and a replay is posted it is clear that the complaint of the OP was false  and they missed some clue like being tunnel visioned when you don't see smoke clouds in zoomed in view.  

 

 

Edited by eviltane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,591
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
28,894 posts
25,145 battles
37 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

Yes, the OP is making an assumption the issue was due to an err in the graphics. Several made the assumption the OP did not understand the OP understood concealment mechanics. With over 9k battles the odds are more in favor of the OP & those accusing him of not understand conceal mechanics being wrong.

I find many post are made out of frustration. The more frustrated a person is the less likelihood of the complaint being rational. 

I doubt if many playing this game know the workings of the computer & the internet. They turn it on & hope it works. If they have an issue they blame something they've heard others complain about.

Wasn't IPcop that used the catch phrase "the bad packet stops here"?

There's a bunch of players with thousands upon thousands that have little clue about fundamental game mechanics.  It also shows in their performance.

 

I learned long ago that "Battles Played" is not indicative of player skill.  In WoWS, more Battles Played =/= even a decent player.  If they're still bad with thousands and thousands of games, they're even worse.  It means they have a lot of bad habits drilled into them.

 

More practice with bad lessons, bad fundamentals isn't good at all.  It will only make you worse.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,136
[TDRB]
Members
5,162 posts
13,743 battles
8 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

There's a bunch of players with thousands upon thousands that have little clue about fundamental game mechanics.  It also shows in their performance.

 

I learned long ago that "Battles Played" is not indicative of player skill.  In WoWS, more Battles Played =/= even a decent player.  If they're still bad with thousands and thousands of games, they're even worse.  It means they have a lot of bad habits drilled into them.

 

More practice with bad lessons, bad fundamentals isn't good at all.  It will only make you worse.

You did NOT! find any indication in my post of even coming within a billion parsecs of hinting number of battles indicates skill.  Further more skill includes the ability to act on knowledge. A person may have the knowledge but cannot use that knowledge effectively.

You're making an assumption and judging all on that assumption, without a shred of evidence. No I don't expect you to investigate each individual but you can reply in a helpful manner without being condescending. This is my only point.

 

Edited by kgh52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,107
[DPG]
Members
2,044 posts
10,977 battles

This happens in a cyclone all the time.  When your field of vision is reduced to 8km; your teammate can be 7km from the ship and spot it fine but if you're 8.1km away you will only see it outlined on the minimap.  Due to that little circle that shows where your shots will fall you can now get pretty good at leading and hitting that little ghost ship icon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,591
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
28,894 posts
25,145 battles
46 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

You did NOT! find any indication in my post of even coming within a billion parsecs of hinting number of battles indicates skill.  Further more skill includes the ability to act on knowledge. A person may have the knowledge but cannot use that knowledge effectively.

You're making an assumption and judging all on that assumption, without a shred of evidence. No I don't expect you to investigate each individual but you can reply in a helpful manner without being condescending. This is my only point.

 

Yes you did: "With over 9k battles the odds are more in favor of the OP & those accusing him of not understand conceal mechanics being wrong."

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

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.

×