Glitch with LaFayette invisible to recon!!!!

[Khartoum Kitchener]

Its impossible and no fun when you cant see it with any recon at all!!!!! FIX THIS ISSUE

[Rococo Era]

la baguette i by far the best ship in the game. pair it with a group on cham su ris and its invincible.

[Flergnerg]

ijw1234 eredeti hozzászólása:

GENERAL YURI eredeti hozzászólása:

Its not a glitch, its french bias.

Da, tovarish. French magic stealth ship with 60% ECM, 80%Acc missiles, and rapid fire anti-ship missiles? French Bias if I've ever seen it........

i fell the 60% ECM is fair considering its subpar CIWS

[Wejj23]

BigSexyJbone eredeti hozzászólása:

ijw1234 eredeti hozzászólása:

Da, tovarish. French magic stealth ship with 60% ECM, 80%Acc missiles, and rapid fire anti-ship missiles? French Bias if I've ever seen it........

i fell the 60% ECM is fair considering its subpar CIWS

60% ECM makes the Lafayette the best gunfighting ship in the game, as nothing else is able to get hits on it, while the Lafayette shoots strait and true. Also, the Lafayette has it's 80% Acc Crotales, and you could just add some Cham Su Ri escorts in to compensate for the lack of gun-based CIWS.

[Cullen's Hound]

Regardless, it is still not invisible at range to the proper recon.
And just so you know, naval helicopters use sonar, not radar.
Irl sonar's range is much greater then radar's.

[DS]

It's not a glitch. La Fayette has medium stealth, exceptional optics and long-ranged anti-heli missiles, which in total makes him hard to spot by helis. There was a table of spotting range somewhere, which I sadly, can't find, but the idea is that with exceptional optics you spot medium steath targets in the open at a range of about 3km, while LF's antiheli missiles have range of 3500. Gazelle that was mentioned before, while having small size has poor stealth, meaning that it can be spotted at much greater distance, allowing LF to hit it before it is spotted. And size of heli doesn't help it to stay not-spotted, just makes difficult to hit it. But LF has basic acuracy of 80% + some additional accuracy for veterancy, which means - heli would be dead after first shot.

To counter LFs try using land-based recon, putting some recon teams on islands - if they'd stay in forests with good or exceptional stealth - LF would have a lot of troubles noticing them. Or use stealth recon helis, like Ninja or Tiger (though I won't recommend it - you'd have to control them and constantly moving to keep as far from LF as possible). The third option is using helis with sea optics - they have some bonuses to finding ships - at least that's what I was told, since I haven't tried it myself.

[Wejj23]

Great Caesar's Ghost eredeti hozzászólása:

Regardless, it is still not invisible at range to the proper recon.
And just so you know, naval helicopters use sonar, not radar.
Irl sonar's range is much greater then radar's.

They can and do use both. Radar is used to detect surface and airborne targets, hence why the Lafayette is stealth to begin with. Sonar is generally only used to detect underwater objects, like mines or submarines. It lacks the range to detect a ship at modern combat distances, unlike radar which can quite easily pick up targets at long ranges.

[Cullen's Hound]

Quite untrue, helicopter and submarine sonar have ranges that far exceed where surface and airborne radars would lose a ship over the horizon. It doesn't matter if a radars range is hundreds of miles if you can't draw a straight line though the curve. Destroyers and frigates in this game are only in scale if you handle their combat as an abstraction.

[Wejj23]

Great Caesar's Ghost eredeti hozzászólása:

Quite untrue, helicopter and submarine sonar have ranges that far exceed where surface and airborne radars would lose a ship over the horizon. It doesn't matter if a radars range is hundreds of miles if you can't draw a straight line though the curve. Destroyers and frigates in this game are only in scale if you handle their combat as an abstraction.

Sonar suffers from curvature just as much as radar, besides also suffering from the characteristics of the open ocean. And if what you are saying was true, then why bother with RCS-reducing technology on warships? Oh, right, because radar is still the primary method of detecting and engaging enemy warships.
Sonar is used almost exclusively in ASW duties and by submarines themselves. It does not have the range to detect ships at standard missile engagement ranges. Radar on the other hand does.
Frigate and destroyer ship v ship combat is condensed, not abstracted per se. Mostly it's to prevent them from spewing missiles at each other from extreme ranges out of reach of other ships. Essentially, balance reasons.

[Cullen's Hound]

The reasons ships still have radar is for air threats and because their own passage interferes with their sonar, which in this era is still mostly bow mounted. Not only does curvature not hinder sonar it actually helps it, the different thermal layers also can help sonar. The reason helicopters are better is because they can sit and hover with their sonars lowered into the water and listen without any interference, if you are using radar everyone knows where you are. Submarines are used for recon way more then aircraft even the good ones that are no t represented in this game.

[Wejj23]

Great Caesar's Ghost eredeti hozzászólása:

The reasons ships still have radar is for air threats and because their own passage interferes with their sonar, which in this era is still mostly bow mounted. Not only does curvature not hinder sonar it actually helps it, the different thermal layers also can help sonar. The reason helicopters are better is because they can sit and hover with their sonars lowered into the water and listen without any interference, if you are using radar everyone knows where you are. Submarines are used for recon way more then aircraft even the good ones that are no t represented in this game.

You're avoiding the question. If ships use sonar, not radar, to detect other ships, then why are large, modern navies investing time and money into RCS-reducing technology on their warships?
Also, you can set a radar in receive-only mode, which hides you completely while allowing you to pinpoint the location of enemy ships or planes using radar actively.

[Cullen's Hound]

They are also continuing sonar research your question is meaningless. Passive radar only detects if the enemy is actively broadcasting. If a ship is moving it is making noise, even when it is not sonar can hear anything operating inside the ship. This is 1990, the Stealth Seawolf is still to launch and the Los Angeles Class can take pictures of your hull.
Edit: Btw, do you know what gives the Seawolf stealth? It's not a reduced radar profile.

[Wejj23]

Great Caesar's Ghost eredeti hozzászólása:

They are also continuing sonar research your question is meaningless. Passive radar only detects if the enemy is actively broadcasting. If a ship is moving it is making noise, even when it is not sonar can hear anything operating inside the ship. This is 1990, the Stealth Seawolf is still to launch and the Los Angeles Class can take pictures of your hull.
Edit: Btw, do you know what gives the Seawolf stealth? It's not a reduced radar profile.

It is by no means meaningless. You seem to be deliberately avoiding the question.
And sure, the Seawolf is "stealthy". As is the Lafayette. However, the Seawolf is a submarine. Submarines don't need to reduce RCS because they aren't on the surface, so of course they won't have RCS reducing measures.
Navies continue to invest in sonar tech for ASW purposes. It has not, and never will be the primary method of detecting and engaging enemy ships at long range. That is the domain airborne and surface radars. Submarines may use sonar to track ships, but this is because they have no other options.
And this is 1991, not 1990. Welcome to the era of Backfires and anti-ship missiles. The era where long range naval engagements with anti-ship missiles dominate. Where radar is a crucial method of detecting and engaging enemy warships.

[Cullen's Hound]

It is meaningless, it is the same as stating that atgm missiles are better then tank guns and the proof of it is that militaries continue to research missiles, meaningless. None of this really matters since Eugen seems to agree with me and the proof of that is when I am playing naval my naval helicopter have no problem locating the Lafayette outside of its air defense range while you are here whining about French bias.

[Wejj23]

Great Caesar's Ghost eredeti hozzászólása:

It is meaningless, it is the same as stating that atgm missiles are better then tank guns and the proof of it is that militaries continue to research missiles, meaningless. None of this really matters since Eugen seems to agree with me and the proof of that is when I am playing naval my naval helicopter have no problem locating the Lafayette outside of its air defense range while you are here whining about French bias.

I'm sorry but are you using ad hominems? Because it sure seems that way. You also seem to be unable to detect obvious humor.
Also, it is not meaningless. If radar was not used the detect ships at long range, there would not be an investment of time and money into reducing the RCS of warships. Simple as that.
I never even complained about naval helicopter detection. You're blatantly putting words in my mouth. I stated that it's absurd that Mk.1 Eyeball+Binocs is incapable of detecting a giant grey blob on the horizon.

[Cullen's Hound]

Btw the way, the way the backfires would have attacked nato is as many as are available attack at the same time launching all their missiles in quick succesion at the rough area that the russians submarine fleet says that the nato fleet is and when the missile comes into the area it switches on its radar seeker warhead and attacks the first thing it sees, they are in no way guided.