180 cover arc?

[gunnersman]

Armor cover arc. Brilliant!

Movable waypoints! Yes!

Target Briefly Command, Expanded floating, FoW floating icons, Canister rounds, OUT-FRIGGIN-STANDING!

Now I have to ask...is the 180 degree cover arc key combo available? I miss it greatly.

[Erwin]

+1 on the 180 degree arc.

Used it all the time in CM1, and it wastes a lot of time doing it in CM2. I know we're told that it's not necessary in CM2 as there is no great increase in spotting ability, but so long as there is ANY advantage in a covered arc for spotting, I feel one should use it.

[Vinnart]

I liked the quick 180 too, but I have found making arcs from a top down view works best making more symetric looking arcs.

[Erwin]

Agreed, but it takes more time. And there are so many clicks/actions needed in CM2 that all those extras all add up to a significant amount of time compared to CM1 "instant 180 degree arcs".

[noob]

Agreed, but it takes more time. And there are so many clicks/actions needed in CM2 that all those extras all add up to a significant amount of time compared to CM1 "instant 180 degree arcs".

True, if the 180 degree arc tool were available, the amount of clicks would be reduced by 50% given it takes at least two clicks to make one at the moment, then add to that the seconds used to drag the pointer out to create a symmetrical arc, so as mentioned, there would be a significant reduction in time spent micro managing if this function was implemented.

[gunnersman]

Not to mention it would also make it easier to "center" your aim. In other words, point the barrel of your AFV in the appropriate area you want all while having a 180 degree arc.

[noob]

Then the Lord said to the Forumites, "Go to Pharaoh and say to him, 'This is what the Lord, the God of the Forumites, says: "Let my 180 degree instant cover arcs go, so that they may save time for me." (.Exe dus 9:1.5)

[gunnersman]

Then the Lord said to the Forumites, "Go to Pharaoh and say to him, 'This is what the Lord, the God of the Forumites, says: "Let my 180 degree instant cover arcs go, so that they may save time for me." (.Exe dus 9:1.5)

LOL! If I were drinking milk upon reading that, it would have shot out of my nose.

[noob]

LOL! If I were drinking milk upon reading that, it would have shot out of my nose.

Then your monitor would look like the female lead in a hentai anime

[Vanir Ausf B]

Then your monitor would look like the female lead in a hentai anime

Well, I'm just going to take your word for that

+1 on the 180° arc. I use them much more than 360.

[MikeyD]

Y'all do realize there's only so many letters in the alphabet and so many keys on a keyboard, right? They've already added so many new commands that they needed to go to a hierarchical menu list on the spacebar popup menu. People will spend hours plotting out moves for their next Wego turn. But drawing your own cover arc is too much effort?

[Erwin]

I want to spend as much time on tactics (plotting moves) as I can, not fighting the game interface and wasting time on non-tactical stuff that used to be easy. What is wrong with that?

[womble]

If all you're using a CA for is to set which way they're looking (which is the sum total of the spotting advantage setting a CA provides, you would be better off using a Face.

[Baneman]

Hmm, why DOES a covered arc NOT provide a spotting advantage ? Is this gospel ?

IIRC, it was a Beta-tester who said that it doesn't, but the manual states "the target arc increases the chances that units will recognise and engage an enemy threat within the target area quickly"

This seems to imply (to me anyway) that it does confer some spotting advantage ( and I've been using it that way all this time until the recent post stating the opposite ).

It seems a strange design decision to have an "only engage targets here" command that doesn't include an emphasis on looking in that direction.

Although I accept that maybe there's a code limitation that they can't program "extra" spotting cycles in only one area ( feels like a wriggly piece of coding )

[noob]

If all you're using a CA for is to set which way they're looking (which is the sum total of the spotting advantage setting a CA provides, you would be better off using a Face.

CA's are mainly used for facing "and" engagement range manipulation, which is a common task in CM, so making it easier would be good if it wasn't to much of a problem coding it.

[Lt Belenko]

Then your monitor would look like the female lead in a hentai anime

To even know what this means is scary.

[gunnersman]

...But drawing your own cover arc is too much effort?

To get it right, yes.

Sometimes you might need to go off the board to get the right size. And this can be inconsistent when your unit is close to the edge of the board. Going off the edge throws things out of whack, so to speak.

All you need is to hit "Ctrl + (letter of choice)" or "Alt + (letter of choice), and move your cursor to the desired distance and heading for the aim point and then you are done. It is way easier as opposed to clicking the first point, (which may or may not be the right distance you want) and then finding the second point, only to realize that it is not centered where you want it and/or your distance is not enough and then start over (although I am better at it now then I was before). And sometimes you must go to a top/down view to do this. Particularly if you want certain units, such as FO's or HQ's to observe and not shoot. You might want a tiny arc, but you want a 180 arc and not a narrow one, so they will observe as much of the battlefield as possible.

Sure you can use a cover arc to get you in the general direction, but it may not be wide enough or long enough.

My liking is to have my AFV point in "This direction without the exclusion of all other possible contacts". And the "Face" command does not always cut it.

And when on the move it is also much easier just to throw up and 180 arc, particularly for hunt commands or for a series of waypoints.

If the lack of letters is a problem, I have no problem sacrificing least used letters and putting them to work.

[Baneman]

... Particularly if you want certain units, such as FO's or HQ's to observe and not shoot. You might want a tiny arc, but you want a 180 arc and not a narrow one, so they will observe as much of the battlefield as possible.

...

But some posts imply that they will be observing all of the battlefield anyway, hence my post higher up questioning whether this is true or not.

[Erwin]

Issue well stated by gunnersman. The current system of creating arcs takes time away from the actual fun stuff - esp if you like to view the wonderful graphics down low and personal.

[Steiner14]

+1.

Pls 180° modifier!

[Vinnart]

If all you're using a CA for is to set which way they're looking (which is the sum total of the spotting advantage setting a CA provides, you would be better off using a Face.

FACE does not work for rotating the turret in a desired direction on the move, which is mainly when I use them. I agree though that FACE is best for stationary units for general use, and is it is so much easier on the eyes than the arc graphic.

Tiny arc is the way to go as others have stated to observe best while not being spotted, and it is so much easier on the eyes than a large arc while accomplishing the same purpose.

When I set an arc I would say 95% of the time I prefer 180 degree to give best coverage in a particular direction. The depth depends on the purpose.

Holding the Ctrl button + arc command looks like it could be used to create a 180 degree, and all the player would have to do is drag to the desired depth, and click ONCE.

[Vinnart]

Holding the Ctrl button + arc command looks like it could be used to create a 180 degree, and all the player would have to do is drag to the desired depth, and click ONCE.

Oops I forgot I think that one is used for 360 arc, which I rarely use since I havn't found myself doing ambushes in buildings much, which is where I could see that being useful.

There is always the Alt key, or Ctrl+Alt together.