How do you calculate the LOS when a squad is not in the same 8*8m grid?

[Battlefront.com]

thewood,

So if you move A and B back along the wall slightly so the action spots are behind the wall, will soldiers in A and B that are on the corners not spot each other even though they are a meter or two apart?

Remember, this is a grid so either the Action Spots are directly touching or they are in increments of 8m apart. Therefore, there is no possibility of the Action Spots being "a meter or two apart" since 8m is the minimum they can be without touching.

Without specific instructions from you as to where you're picturing the different A and B locations being, I'll just take a blind stab at a few examples:

1. If you shifted B to the right one column I'm sure it would inherently have no LOS to A.

2. If you shifted A down one row it would still be possible for a unit in B to spot the unit in A (and vice versa since it's always two ways) since B straddles both sides of the wall.

3. If you shifted B down one row it would still be theoretically possible for A and B to spot each other.

Now, where things get really specific is where the unit in B is. If it is on the opposite side of the wall from A, then the chances of it spotting a unit in A are proportional to the amount that wall blocks viewing. If that was a short wall and the units were standing, there would be no blockage at all. If one were prone and the other standing, probably no blockage either. If it were a tall wall and both units were infantry, then probably completely blocked. So on and so forth.

This is mostly true for LOF as well, but LOF is far more strict. Probability has some say in if a unit is spotted or not, LOF does not have ANYTHING to do with that and is a strict, straight calculation from the specific location of the of the shooter to the specific location of the target. With Traditional LOS/LOF this would be calculated based on a set height and then abstracted based on stance, in Enhanced LOS/LOF it is calculated directly using stance.

Hope that further clears up some of the questions and (worse) disinformation out there.

Steve

[76mm]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Now, where things get really specific is where the unit in B is. If it is on the opposite side of the wall from A, then the chances of it spotting a unit in A are proportional to the amount that wall blocks viewing. If that was a short wall and the units were standing, there would be no blockage at all. If one were prone and the other standing, probably no blockage either. If it were a tall wall and both units were infantry, then probably completely blocked. So on and so forth.

[/QB]

Steve,

this is all very helpful, but I'd like to clarify: in the paragraph above, I understand that you're assuming that the two action spots have LOS, and now you're in the "spotting" phase to see whether the two units can actually see each other, right?

If so, it seems like spotting can actually serve as a back-up LOS check, as in the case of the tall wall you describe above, right? (In other words, chance of spotting is zero, so LOS is effectively blocked).

A different spotting scenario would be where a unit is hidden in underbrush or in a building, to which the enemy has LOS, but there is a probability-based "spotting" check to see whether the hidden unit is spotted.

Is my understanding correct? If not, my concern would be that two units with a high wall between them could spot (if not fire upon) each other (because the action spots have LOS) even though they shouldn't be able to.

[Battlefront.com]

That's pretty much right, although the Spotting check is really intended for other reasons. You know, a unit is Panicked so what it theoretically can see it probably won't, or it's night and one unit has NVG and the other doesn't. That sort of stuff.

Is my understanding correct? If not, my concern would be that two units with a high wall between them could spot (if not fire upon) each other (because the action spots have LOS) even though they shouldn't be able to.

I think that's unlikely, but even if it did happen "Sound Contact" may explain it. However, in general walls and buildings have special abilities to block inherent LOS between two Action Spots. For buildings this is necessary since they do not sit neatly within the boundaries of a single Action Spot, for walls much the same reason.

Early on the ends of walls were basically ignored completely because it was a difficult situation to assess. That was inadequate so changes were made so wall ends were specifically simulated.

Steve

[thewood]

Let me see if I can clarify my question...

If A and B action spot centers are both hidden from each other just barely behind the wall.

The squads occupying A and B seperately are spread out over the 8m x 8m Action spot.

Can the outlier soldiers whose graphics are beyond the end of the wall potentially see each other if all other parameters allow it.

So in other words, are there times when action spot centers have no possibility of LOS, yet some of thier individual soldiers could be exposed with no possibility of response?

[stikkypixie]

I think the way it works is, that as long as there is a remote possibility that someone in one tile can someone else in another tile, finer checks will be done.

[thewood]

Are you sure or guessing? I thought the action spot's center was the start of the LOS check. I am not sure and a lot of the discussion seems to be about the action spot in the 8m x 8m box, not the odd men in the squad at the periphery of the box.

[Battlefront.com]

thewood,

So in other words, are there times when action spot centers have no possibility of LOS, yet some of thier individual soldiers could be exposed with no possibility of response?

No, no chance of that at all. LOS works both ways, pure and simple. So if someone can shoot into a portion of an Action Spot, anybody there can shoot back. Anything other than that would be a mess of titanic proportions.

Now, I need to revise something I said to Popllt before. He asked:

So there are only two kinds of contacts(entirety LOS or no LOS) between two Action Spots, right?

To which I said that there is only one type of LOS check and it is between the centers of the Action Spots. If the centers are blocked from seeing each other, then both Action Spots are unable to see each other. That's the answer I gave thewood above as well.

The clarification I should have made is as it stands now with Traditional LOS. This is no longer true for Enhanced LOS. To help this I'll use stikkypixie's post from above:

I think the way it works is, that as long as there is a remote possibility that someone in one tile can someone else in another tile, finer checks will be done.

As the game is now, with Traditional LOS, this isn't the case. However, this is exactly what Enhanced LOS does. Specifically each Action Spot is subdivided into a 1x1m sub grid (i.e. 64 "sub Action Spots" per Action Spot) and LOS/Spotting is done between these smaller pieces instead of the Action Spot centers. The Action Spots are still there for movement and a slew of game mechanics reasons (memory, pathfinding, etc.), but from the player's perspective Action Spots no longer matter when it comes to LOS just like they never mattered in terms of LOF.

To make sure people understand how this works, from a gamer's perspective, I'll once again refer to Popllt's A and B spots on either side of a wall:

If two soldiers are in the clear section of Action Spot B, and two enemy soldiers are in the clear section of action Spot A, then those soldiers should be able to see and shoot at each other. Soldiers in the blue shaded areas can not as long as they are in those areas.

The upshot of all of this is that we're getting closer to 1:1 LOS, Spotting, and LOF as we find we can coax the hardware into it. It's still working off an Action Spot grid, it's still not refined down to the exact pixel for everything, but it's getting darned close. Close enough that I don't think you'll have many "WTF?!?" moments with version 1.06. Still entirely possible, mind you, just not nearly as likely now because of the height and sub-Action Spot refinements.

Steve

[J_Toe]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I think the way it works is, that as long as there is a remote possibility that someone in one tile can someone else in another tile, finer checks will be done.

As the game is now, with Traditional LOS, this isn't the case.</font>

[thewood]

Hopefully one last question:

If a squad gets stretched out over several action spots, I have had situations where the leading members come under fire, but don't return fire until the "center" of the squad catches up. That is leading to my questions about action spots of an enemy unit "seeing" an individual, but not the "center" of the unit, then firing on the individual. It seems in those situations, the individual is at a disadvantage.

I assume from what you are saying, those situations are going away.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by thewood:

If a squad gets stretched out over several action spots, I have had situations where the leading members come under fire, but don't return fire until the "center" of the squad catches up. That is leading to my questions about action spots of an enemy unit "seeing" an individual, but not the "center" of the unit, then firing on the individual. It seems in those situations, the individual is at a disadvantage.

I assume from what you are saying, those situations are going away.

If I understand you correctly, the answer is yes.

But: be aware that there might be instances, where other factors (concealment?) prevent the hit guy from recognizing the shooter instantly.

Hopefully, you will find yourself thinking(wondering) much less about LOS in 1.06 and more about playing.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Other Means]

Sub action spots!? So now we have 3 tiers of LOS/LOF checking?

</font>

• Action spots that initiate sub-spot checking</font>
• Sub spots that initiate LOF checking</font>
• Point to point LOF checking</font>

Wow. Just, WOW. I thought that was impossible with current hardware.

[Pandur]

As the game is now, with Traditional LOS, this isn't the case. However, this is exactly what Enhanced LOS does. Specifically each Action Spot is subdivided into a 1x1m sub grid (i.e. 64 "sub Action Spots" per Action Spot) and LOS/Spotting is done between these smaller pieces instead of the Action Spot centers.

NICE!!! for this i happilie sacrifice the "biggest" missions i can play now becouse of the upped checkes. from former 8x8(still used) to 1x1 sub action spot grid + the height positions :cool:

here, take one of these! ->

[Battlefront.com]

Thewood,

f a squad gets stretched out over several action spots, I have had situations where the leading members come under fire, but don't return fire until the "center" of the squad catches up.

There must be other reasons for this because, as I said before, there is no such thing as "unit center" in the code. Meaning, the code has zero understanding of the concept and therefore can't possibly do anything with such a concept. Computers are kinda dumb that way Therefore, it is impossible for what you've described to happen for the reasons you've speculated are involved.

Now, I'm not saying that stuff like that hasn't happened to you. I'm just saying it has to have happened for some other reasons. Rollstoy is correct to say:

be aware that there might be instances, where other factors (concealment?) prevent the hit guy from recognizing the shooter instantly.

Correct. Reaction times based on a slew of factors is most likely what Thewood has experienced. We've made significant changes to v1.06, however there are a couple of things I want us to look at more closely with v1.07. We've spent enough time on v1.06, so delaying the release now for these few possible areas to tweak seems to be a bad idea.

OtherMeans,

Wow. Just, WOW. I thought that was impossible with current hardware.

So did we The Action Spots are still cutting way down on the initial calculations, which is where the speed hit always is. The point to point checks are actually quite quick for the CPU to handle and doesn't involve choking the RAM up either. So once Charles managed to refine the grid within the Action Spot, the individual checks between sub-Action Spot 1x1m squares became not a big deal.

Still, I didn't think we'd be seeing this until sometime next year. I like surprises like this

Steve

Steve

[Other Means]

Bumping this for sub-action spots.

[Battlefront.com]

And they appreciate it

Steve

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Battlefront.com]

We would like to say that too, but I'd guess someone might find an odd circumstance that needs to be corrected. That's the cross we all have to bare for CM having an extremely diverse and lively environment

Steve

[YankeeDog]

Careful there, Steve. I think you can get arrested for displaying a bare cross in some states. . .