ntg84 Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Partial, full, none? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt B M Deleted Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 To tell you the truth, I use none. That way, I can see all the names of the enemies and their conditions. I can enjoy the whole element of the game a lot more without any fog of war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
getthat_wreckoff_theroad Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 What no FOW ? Surely this leads to no unexpected surprises ? For me (and probably most players) full FOW for a real seat of the pants experience. [This message has been edited by getthat_wreckoff_theroad (edited 06-22-2000).] [This message has been edited by getthat_wreckoff_theroad (edited 06-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Ayers Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Well, if you think about it, "full" would seem the most realistic. If you were in combat, you wouldn't know where the enemy would be or at what strength. You'd be clueless until you see them. If you could see where they were and how much firepower they had, there would be no reason to have patrols to scout ahead, or to move ahead with caution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Captain (and anyone else who doesn't use FOW): You have definitely got to try full FOW in a night battle to gain appreciation for what it must have been like to have been a commander in WWII. I'm not saying use it all the time (even though I do), but it will truly humble you. I just had my ass handed to me in a plastic baggy by the AI in a night battle. I had a tank destroyer knocked out by a &*#^%ing flak gun because I didn't see the damned thing until I was 25 yards from it! Guys walked right into MG nests, rifle fire picked off leaders, etc. You get the point. Next time, I'll take it much more slowwwwllllyyy in a night battle. Rushing forward just gets you annhilated! On a side note, if you practice against the AI without full FOW, you are doing yourself a huge disservice if you plan on doing a PBEM! The strategy is completely different - more realistic - with FOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Yeah but Manieri plays PBEM games with FOW off too and doesn't tell his opponents ( as I found out when I played him, remember ? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwin Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 I'm going to have to go on assumptions here as I always play with full FOW. It seems as though no FOW would create an entirely different game. There would be no ambushes, no way for the defender to hide his troops or have a hidden fresh platoon for a late game suprise. On a map such as VoT the germans wouldn't have a chance in hell vs any solid commander. Not that playing without FOW doesn't involve strategy but the scenarios would have to be redesigned for play balance. As it is now to play without FOW would give the advantage directly to the attacker. For me a large aspect of the game is the scouting and manouvering before the heavy action. Most of what I'm trying to do in the beginning of a game is locate and identify as much of the enemy as possible looking for clues as to his thinking. To be able to see all my opponents units from the start would take away a huge element of the game and would not reward many historically successful tactics making it a less realistic portrayal of WWII in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Peltz Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 I would never play any game of this type with anything less than full fog of war- it wouldn't feel right, sort of like kissing your sister... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 I totally agree, Kevin. Full fog of war, or no war at all! No FOW is like playing poker while you're looking at your opponents cards... Juju Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 FOW is always Full unless you are completely new to wargaming or are having trouble with the game interface or something. As for PBEM...it is unsportsman like conduct to play any other way than Full FOW in any game any time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Right on the money Kevin, No fog of war? Eeeeew! Of course, there are those who DO like to kiss their sisters too....Eeeeew! Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Clark Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 You have to remember that we all play computer games for different reasons. Some want a 'realistic' experience, some want to emphasis just the strategic part, while other just wants to kill time. Now matter how one plays, it must be fun and if playing with or without FOW is fun, that's ok, IMHO. For me, when I will start to play CM, I will have no FOW because it will take awhile for me to learn the game and to learn about WW2 tactics. However, I do agree that when playing PBEM, it must be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaffertape Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Just a note to anybody who will ever play me in a PBEM: I always play full FOW. No question. GAFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikeydz Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Considering the Capt. Mani incident... Is FOW settings now forced in PBEM games? If I create a game, will it automatically force my opponent to use the same settings. BTW, did you ever replay the game with Mani using FOW on Fionn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostOne Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 Isn't there a way to lock full FOW (or whatever is agreed upon) in a PBEM so both parties have to use it? Couldn't imagine playing without full FOW. Ghost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Khann Posted June 23, 2000 Share Posted June 23, 2000 I always use Full fog of war, and appreciate the "partial and gradual" manner in which the AI reveals enemy troop info. Mannheim Tanker, if you want to see a really cool looking night battlefield, try a night battle in heavy fog. Papa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 I always use full FOW, both against AI and opponents (okay, opponent, have only had the one PBEM so far), and wouldn't consider any other way. I certainly wouldn't expect to see any posts complaining about the AI or trumpeting their triumphs over it if they weren't using full FOW. But cerainly for people starting out and working for the basics, as well as becoming used to the interface, I could see some lessening of the FOW. I know there's been times when I wondered how effective something I did was, but had only sketchy info to judge from. Still, I suppose if I play a few million times, I'll have compiled enough sketchy info to make definitive decisions. That thought does not displease me. ------------------ After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraut Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 Man, anyone who plays CM without full FOW has gotta be insane. The full FOW feature is the best part of the game! Where is the fun in a wargame if you can see all the enemies, where they are headed and what they are doing? Boring as hell ... lol Even partial FOW sounds really, really boring (havn't tried it yet, probably never will). If you identify the enemy as soon as they come into LOS that takes half of the fun away. MK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Imperator Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 Is it just me, or is there room for a "Fuller" FOW setting? It seems that sometimes I get more information than a real battlefield commander would have. Particularly, I don't see how it would be possible to determine the experience level of the enemy until you capture some. At best you'd be able to guess based on their actions. Also, some unit identifications seem to be awfully fast and accurate. I often can't tell the German halftracks or the two dozen Shermans apart; how can my troops, under fire, without extensive training, at a distance, determine whether they're shooting at a rifle squad or an engineering squad? How do they count the dead members of a squad that's moved? Or even the living ones of a squad hidden in the woods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisl Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 Full FOW is part of what makes CM special, at least to someone who grew up on board wargames, where either you lived with partial or no FOW, or you had horrendous bookkeeping to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 I think against the AI there should be an option for full FOW for the human and NO FOW for the AI. Might be interesting.. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoker Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 Nothing is more exciting than running smack dab into an MG42 while trying a quick flanking maneuver. You don't get the thrill without FOW. It becomes more of a chess type of experience. ------------------ Smoker out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phandaal Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 There shouldn't even be an option for no FOW in my opinion. phandaal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka kingtiger Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 Imperator Yes. I think "Fuller" FOW would be more better indead. Richard Kalajian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted June 25, 2000 Share Posted June 25, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Imperator: Is it just me, or is there room for a "Fuller" FOW setting? It seems that sometimes I get more information than a real battlefield commander would have. Particularly, I don't see how it would be possible to determine the experience level of the enemy until you capture some. At best you'd be able to guess based on their actions. Also, some unit identifications seem to be awfully fast and accurate. I often can't tell the German halftracks or the two dozen Shermans apart; how can my troops, under fire, without extensive training, at a distance, determine whether they're shooting at a rifle squad or an engineering squad? How do they count the dead members of a squad that's moved? Or even the living ones of a squad hidden in the woods?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think some of this is just the 'mechanics' of design, and some a kind of compromise so that people get some legitimate feedback on tactics, effectiveness, and, dare I say it, satisfaction. There have been times when I've lost people in horrible battles, and finally eradicated my enemies, or at least seen who they were, and my feeling is: 'okay, let's see who did this'. It's a little of the 'okay, the butt kicking is done, we're in the taking names, phase, people, so line up and speak clearly.' ------------------ After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts