Extreme FOW Question

[Fred]

Originally posted by Abbott:

just a minority opinion...people that think that NO information is realistic...on a tactical level, every AT gun commander can tell, if a tank you shoot at 100m is disabled or not...it simply does not shoot back Fred

Ah, that clears it up. You meant what can be seen at 100 meters.

Yes,

tactical ROEs, this victory point thingie was not this important to me...I usually do not read the number count, I look on the map and I know if I am winning or loosing...and in CMBB the AI kicks my aXX !

I raise my hat to Charles, because no one from BFC ever stated that the AI will be improved...but they did!

Fred

[lassner.1]

"Really? Why wouldn't a gunner know which side of a vehicle he had hit?

Michael

[ September 04, 2002, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]"

Actually I am not talking about the gunner knowing information from where the shots are falling, but the *receiving* tank being able to know where it is being hit. Would a crew necessarily know the exact facing from which it was taking fire 1) on the first shot and 2) if it (the tank receiving fire) was buttoned up? I admit that I do not know the answer to this question and I am happy to defer to those with more knowledge on the subject than myself. What *is* the case is that I have been able to deduce where enemy AT guns are – even though they remain invisible due to the FOW – from knowing where my tank is taking fire.

[aka_tom_w]

bump

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by lassner:

"Really? Why wouldn't a gunner know which side of a vehicle he had hit?

Michael

[ September 04, 2002, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]"

Actually I am not talking about the gunner knowing information from where the shots are falling, but the *receiving* tank being able to know where it is being hit. Would a crew necessarily know the exact facing from which it was taking fire 1) on the first shot and 2) if it (the tank receiving fire) was buttoned up? I admit that I do not know the answer to this question and I am happy to defer to those with more knowledge on the subject than myself. What *is* the case is that I have been able to deduce where enemy AT guns are – even though they remain invisible due to the FOW – from knowing where my tank is taking fire.

Ah, an excellent point you have there. This would really stand out if your T-34 takes a hit, and the detailed armor text says "rear upper hull hit, shell broke up" - now you know there is something behind you...maybe the crew wouldn't know that from the 1st shot, esp. in the noisy heat of battle.

[Kuma of Finland]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

I can quote account after account from the gunners perspective in both tanks and AT guns where they describe their rounds boucning, penetrating, immobilising, etc.

Just curious why some of you guys fell we should be hide this info from the player when it is recorded in real life AAR's?

I'll add my thoughts here again (completely IMHO, as always)

I wasn't quite clear with my earlier post to this thread. Refined opinion: Please reduce the information shown in detailed armor shots when EFOW is selected. Examples:

- in extremely short distances (where hits are visible with naked eye): 'ricochet', 'hit to left side turret', 'penetration in lower front hull' etc. you get the idea (?) but still no information about severness of the penetration

- in short distances (where hits are visible with binoculars): ricochet, hit to front turret, hit to left lower hull etc. but no information about penetrations and their severness

- in longer distances (where tanks are visible with binoculars but hits are visible very seldom): 'ricochet', 'hit', 'hit?' etc. but not very clear and/or definitive information

And I still stand behind my other points in my previous post, too, until someone shows me a better way. And yes, the CMBB way is the best. I might not like it with full of my heart, but I'll still like it lol

/kuma

[tar]

Tom W: I wondered if i was the only one to notice the "clue" of the victory points going up in EFOW when the only thing firing was arty (before any confirmed contact with the enemy)

I actually didn't notice that. I just thought that the victory percentages should be suppressed on general principles. I think it helps to get more directly involved in the battle being simulated rather than the game. Why should the commanders know (in that detail) how well the battle is going?

One should estimate it based on the map, not read it off the display. Besides, just not showing the victory percentage is likely to be much easier to do than reworking the code to keep a real and a hidden value.

Apropos other observations: Has anyone else run into the enemy display showing the armament count when the men OK and casualty fields are blank (after an identified unit breaks LOS and reverts to less information?)

[aka_tom_w]

there is no doubt in EFOW that you can see a gun get knocked out.

The crew appears beside it and you know it is dead.

Maybe this is correct? or intended?

Should that behaviour be that obvious in Extreme FOW?

-tom w

[ September 05, 2002, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[aka_tom_w]

I am always wondering if I am playing with EFOW on..

Its the only setting I use so I must be

I would be nice to have some visual reminder or clue in the interface indicating which level of FOW you are playing under.

Any more comments on EFOW in the demo?

-tom w

[tar]

I would think that watching the crew abandon the gun would be the best real life clue you could get that a gun was knocked out. If you saw them leaving the gun position, then that would be a good clue.

Anyway, it opens up the possibility of a sneaky human player hiding other infantry next to a gun, and unhiding them just to make you think you knocked out the gun.

Now, here's a question for BTS: Does the newly placed crew have to be spotted individually, or does it inherit the spotted characteristic of the gun it came from? In other words, is it possible at long range for the crew not to be seen?

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by tar:

I would think that watching the crew abandon the gun would be the best real life clue you could get that a gun was knocked out. If you saw them leaving the gun position, then that would be a good clue.

Anyway, it opens up the possibility of a sneaky human player hiding other infantry next to a gun, and unhiding them just to make you think you knocked out the gun.

Now, here's a question for BTS: Does the newly placed crew have to be spotted individually, or does it inherit the spotted characteristic of the gun it came from? In other words, is it possible at long range for the crew not to be seen?

"Now, here's a question for BTS: Does the newly placed crew have to be spotted individually, or does it inherit the spotted characteristic of the gun it came from? In other words, is it possible at long range for the crew not to be seen?"

Good question?

EFOW is fun

-tom w

[lassner.1]

"Really? Why wouldn't a gunner know which side of a vehicle he had hit?

Michael

[ September 04, 2002, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]"

Actually I am not talking about the gunner knowing information from where the shots are falling, but the *receiving* tank being able to know where it is being hit. Would a crew necessarily know the exact facing from which it was taking fire 1) on the first shot and 2) if it (the tank receiving fire) was buttoned up? I admit that I do not know the answer to this question and I am happy to defer to those with more knowledge on the subject than myself. What *is* the case is that I have been able to deduce where enemy AT guns are – even though they remain invisible due to the FOW – from knowing where my tank is taking fire.

Just reposting the response and my question so it does not get lost.

[lassner.1]

bump

[aka_tom_w]

any thing further here?

any comment from BFC?

WHAT?!!

this thread settled to the FIFTH page!!!

keep up the good work

Can we expect any changes in EFOW in a patch after the release version (gone gold by now For sure) ships????? :confused:

-tom w

[Claymore]

I agree Tom. Micheal E posted a new thread regarding EFOW in a NEW thread. We need to keep this one on the front burner.

Damn your eyes for getting on the Pre-order list before me! That will teach me to spend ANY time with the wife and kids.

Cheers

MRD

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Claymore:

I agree Tom. Micheal E posted a new thread regarding EFOW in a NEW thread. We need to keep this one on the front burner.

Damn your eyes for getting on the Pre-order list before me! That will teach me to spend ANY time with the wife and kids.

Cheers

MRD

I agree

We need an Aussie or East Asian co-conspirator ( ) here to bump this thread as we sleep as we are both in North America

EFOW should be on the front burner and should be on the to do list for a post-release patch as it is still not 'extreme' enough to be totally realistic IMHO.

Claymore, don't worry about the pre-order thing at ALL! you are in the States so you will get your game first as ALL us canucks up here MUST wait for the DAMN Canada customs to clear our mail and that could take up to 2-4 WEEKS! extra (they ARE all federal employees after all as you might guess!)

cheers!

-tom w

[ September 07, 2002, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Aacooper]

One thing about EFOW is that there should be a variety of information generated. For example, SLAM's "River and the Gauntlet" talks about in several instances of GI's and/or tanks returning fire on Chinese MG's. Sometimes they believe they knocked it out, sometimes the MG just stops firing back. Using the tank vs AT gun example, the tank could knock out the AT gun, and the AT gun could be shown as knocked out, or it could fade away into a star (with a crew running away), etc... Sometimes you'll see what happened, sometimes you won't.

The same principle is true for armor hits, the info should be varied, including some misleading responses.

As far as my original question (does EFOW affect spotting), I believe after playing a little more it doesn't. The difficulty of spotting definitely gives the defense an advantage. However, shouldn't an AT gun firing on the dry steppe be a little more visible than one firing in the woods due to dust getting kicked up and so forth? Maybe that should be put in the game...

[Flesh]

Originally posted by Aacooper:

However, shouldn't an AT gun firing on the dry steppe be a little more visible than one firing in the woods due to dust getting kicked up and so forth? Maybe that should be put in the game...

Well, I've read about AT gun crews pouring water on the ground in front of the gun to stop dust being kicked up when it fires.

Also, maybe more experienced troops should hide better? Or do they already? Anybody noticed if veterans remain concealed more successfully than greens or conscripts?

[ September 08, 2002, 12:19 AM: Message edited by: Flesh ]

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Claymore, don't worry about the pre-order thing at ALL! you are in the States so you will get your game first as ALL us canucks up here MUST wait for the DAMN Canada customs to clear our mail and that could take up to 2-4 WEEKS! extra (they ARE all federal employees after all as you might guess!)

Here's an idea (probably useless ): if you live close to the border, you might try coming down and renting a Post Office box. Then give that as your address to BFC. When you think CMBB is about due, drive down and check on your box every couple of days. Then, when it arrives, hand carry it across the border.

BTW, the P.O. will require proof of your current address, such as a piece of mail addressed to you, before they will rent you a box, but that should present no difficulties.

Michael

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Claymore, don't worry about the pre-order thing at ALL! you are in the States so you will get your game first as ALL us canucks up here MUST wait for the DAMN Canada customs to clear our mail and that could take up to 2-4 WEEKS! extra (they ARE all federal employees after all as you might guess!)

Here's an idea (probably useless ): if you live close to the border, you might try coming down and renting a Post Office box. Then give that as your address to BFC. When you think CMBB is about due, drive down and check on your box every couple of days. Then, when it arrives, hand carry it across the border.

BTW, the P.O. will require proof of your current address, such as a piece of mail addressed to you, before they will rent you a box, but that should present no difficulties.

Michael</font>

[aka_tom_w]

found this one WAY down on the 11th page

still no response from BFC on the EFOW issue :confused:

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

Just how "extreme" is EFOW?

still wondering if the first CMBB patch will address any of these issues

-tom w

[Sergei]

Guys,

if Extreme FOV is what you want:

Turn off your monitors.

[aka_tom_w]

bump

[aka_tom_w]

bump