Jump to content


Wot 1.0, where even heavytanks can doublebush 50m from you and not get spotted


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
19 replies to this topic

TheOddRogue #1 Posted 15 May 2018 - 10:40 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9985 battles
  • 445
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012
What the [edited]did they do with the bushes? Some are [edited]ridiculous, just now a tiger 2 was 100m away from me doublebushed and shooting! And he wouldn't get spotted, untill ofcourse he set me on fire and killed me, the. he got spotted. It's truly a wonder how these morons manage to make everything just that bit more diseased in this game, well done. 

Strappster #2 Posted 15 May 2018 - 10:42 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,929
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
Double bushing has always worked like that. That's why people recommend it.

TheOddRogue #3 Posted 15 May 2018 - 10:45 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9985 battles
  • 445
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012
It was never this extreme before 1.0 

Balc0ra #4 Posted 15 May 2018 - 10:52 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64454 battles
  • 15,471
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Maps have more vegetation etc in HD that gives cover. So it depends on how tall the bush is, and how much there is between you and him to mask him. If he is far enough behind one, it will be tricky to see him. Just like it was in most forest areas etc before 1.0. As there is to much there that breaks LOS.

 

Then again 50m or 100m? I doubt it was 50m. Replay?


Edited by Balc0ra, 15 May 2018 - 10:53 AM.


SirTogII #5 Posted 15 May 2018 - 11:42 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46751 battles
  • 548
  • [REQT] REQT
  • Member since:
    11-27-2012
Unfair plane, kemp bush?

Simeon85 #6 Posted 15 May 2018 - 11:44 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 2,321
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

You don't even need to double bush, the 1.0 bushes are basically OP, anything will out spot you.

 

I was playing mines the other day in the Super Conqueror, north team, I have like 480m view range on my Super Conqueror, and a 705A was in like the C9 spot only getting spotted when he fired, I was probably about 250m away and he was moving as well behind the bush because he couldn't get gun depression unless he moved up.

 

So a tier 10 heavy, moving, sub 300m away from a tank with over 450m view range and he only got spotted when firing, pretty silly. 



Homer_J #7 Posted 15 May 2018 - 11:54 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27652 battles
  • 29,000
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostTheOddRogue, on 15 May 2018 - 10:40 AM, said:

50m ... 100m ...

 

400m?

 

Make your mind up.

 

And, of course, replay or it didn't happen.



trrprrprr #8 Posted 15 May 2018 - 12:01 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23634 battles
  • 320
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View PostTheOddRogue, on 15 May 2018 - 09:45 AM, said:

It was never this extreme before 1.0 

 

It was, even when i didnt know how that double bushing works i managed to stay hidden against three enemy tanks advancing. I was shooting them and killed all three in a range of 200 to 50meters and never got spotted.  Tried to repeat that and never manage to make it work.  But spotting should be working or implemented from WOWs, where as soon as you shoot you lose camo. WoT should be the same with all that smart stuff with camo% size of tank% caliber of the gun and so on, but WG has that kind of people and could make it work. So lets say T49 with derp would get spotted farther away than T49 with normal gun.

TheOddRogue #9 Posted 15 May 2018 - 12:03 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9985 battles
  • 445
  • Member since:
    08-08-2012

View PostSimeon85, on 15 May 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

You don't even need to double bush, the 1.0 bushes are basically OP, anything will out spot you.

 

I was playing mines the other day in the Super Conqueror, north team, I have like 480m view range on my Super Conqueror, and a 705A was in like the C9 spot only getting spotted when he fired, I was probably about 250m away and he was moving as well behind the bush because he couldn't get gun depression unless he moved up.

 

So a tier 10 heavy, moving, sub 300m away from a tank with over 450m view range and he only got spotted when firing, pretty silly. 

 

Arguably the most sensible person on the forums agrees with me, I can't be wrong, this is a a new thing. 

Strappster #10 Posted 15 May 2018 - 12:11 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,929
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSimeon85, on 15 May 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

You don't even need to double bush, the 1.0 bushes are basically OP, anything will out spot you.

 

I was playing mines the other day in the Super Conqueror, north team, I have like 480m view range on my Super Conqueror, and a 705A was in like the C9 spot only getting spotted when he fired, I was probably about 250m away and he was moving as well behind the bush because he couldn't get gun depression unless he moved up.

 

So a tier 10 heavy, moving, sub 300m away from a tank with over 450m view range and he only got spotted when firing, pretty silly. 

 

He was more than 15m behind the bush. That gives a major boost to camo but there's a common misconception that you'll remain invisible if you're 15m+ back and you fire. If he'd been within 15m you'd have burnt off the bush camo and seen him, unless there was a rise in the ground or a rock or something preventing LoS to his vision points.

Enforcer1975 #11 Posted 15 May 2018 - 12:12 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20725 battles
  • 10,585
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostSimeon85, on 15 May 2018 - 11:44 AM, said:

You don't even need to double bush, the 1.0 bushes are basically OP, anything will out spot you.

 

I was playing mines the other day in the Super Conqueror, north team, I have like 480m view range on my Super Conqueror, and a 705A was in like the C9 spot only getting spotted when he fired, I was probably about 250m away and he was moving as well behind the bush because he couldn't get gun depression unless he moved up.

 

So a tier 10 heavy, moving, sub 300m away from a tank with over 450m view range and he only got spotted when firing, pretty silly. 

 

You do know that as long as a tank doesn't shoot or expose any of it's spotting points or is far enough behind a bush it can't be seen? 

 

According to the camo calculator you can't see the 705A around 250m unless it's firing assuming it was hidden behind dense bushes and the bushes are less than 15m away and the tank has a full camo crew and camo paint. 

 

Edit: ninja'd

 

As Strappster mentioned if the 705A was more than 15m behind a bush the spotting distance would be 257m, shooting inside 15m would be 427m assuming the Super Conquerer has 100% on situational awareness, recon and vents. 


Edited by Enforcer1975, 15 May 2018 - 12:16 PM.


Simeon85 #12 Posted 15 May 2018 - 04:03 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 2,321
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostStrappster, on 15 May 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

 

He was more than 15m behind the bush.

 

He wasn't.

 

As I said he had to move up to a position where he had the gun depression to actually fire at us, this meant he was so far forward that he was basically almost outside the bush on the other side (cos rear turreted tank), and he only got spotted after he fired.

 

Which was my point, the bush had enough camo to hide a tier 10 heavy tank that was moving and wasn't double bushed. That is silly, old bushes generally did not provide that level of camo, most counted as light or medium bush and heavies and other tanks with poor camo couldn;t use them well.

 

It appears to me that basically every bush after 1.0 offers the maximum camo value. 



LordMuffin #13 Posted 15 May 2018 - 04:15 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 48080 battles
  • 10,876
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
I agree with  OP on this.
The new bushes do, in general, provide to much camouflage.

In general a new camo mechanic has to be made imo.
Idea: Some tanks get greater bonuses from bushes then others (not all tanks are equally good at hiding in bushes).


DracheimFlug #14 Posted 15 May 2018 - 04:54 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostSimeon85, on 15 May 2018 - 04:03 PM, said:

 

He wasn't.

 

As I said he had to move up to a position where he had the gun depression to actually fire at us, this meant he was so far forward that he was basically almost outside the bush on the other side (cos rear turreted tank), and he only got spotted after he fired.

 

Which was my point, the bush had enough camo to hide a tier 10 heavy tank that was moving and wasn't double bushed. That is silly, old bushes generally did not provide that level of camo, most counted as light or medium bush and heavies and other tanks with poor camo couldn;t use them well.

 

It appears to me that basically every bush after 1.0 offers the maximum camo value. 

 

Wait.. so where was the bush then? Behind him? If he wasn't more than 15m behind the bush, but had to pull up to fire at you... But he did get spotted after he fired, so double bushing likely was not that relevant.

 

Again... replay?



LCpl_Jones #15 Posted 15 May 2018 - 06:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9759 battles
  • 698
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    06-17-2017

and yet i still manage to find a bush that gives zero cover :unsure:

 

 



DeBanus #16 Posted 15 May 2018 - 06:59 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28761 battles
  • 226
  • [-NARF] -NARF
  • Member since:
    11-19-2011

You seem surprised.

 

After all its new content created by Wargaming, in other words: Lower your expectations



AliceUnchained #17 Posted 15 May 2018 - 07:03 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38173 battles
  • 8,820
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011
No replays, should be tossed straight in the garbage bin with all the other pointless threads about this...

ID_100 #18 Posted 15 May 2018 - 07:45 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 25740 battles
  • 109
  • [IMAGE] IMAGE
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

 

 



Jigabachi #19 Posted 15 May 2018 - 08:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17858 battles
  • 18,578
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostAliceUnchained, on 15 May 2018 - 07:03 PM, said:

No replays, should be tossed straight in the garbage bin with all the other pointless threads about this...

There seem to be some strange things happening, but I agree that these "He was invisible, but I basically could have touched his barrel!"-threads without replays really don't help at all.



Asklepi0s #20 Posted 16 May 2018 - 08:11 AM

    Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 5780 battles
  • 840
  • [WG_M] WG_M
  • Member since:
    01-23-2017
This thread has been closed by the moderation team due to not being constructive.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users