How’s that LOS tool working for?

[Rocky Balboa]

The current method of checking line of site needs to change in the next major update to the CMx2 engine. Using the targeting tool in CMSF was ok because the terrain was mostly featureless however, due to the complexities of the terrain in CMBN, I find that using the targeting tool is adequate at best. This is a contributing factor in why I rarely play RT but even in WEGO I spend far too much time checking and testing LOS using the targeting tool. What we need is a single button or key press that will show us all the grid squares on a map that a unit can see/target.

I think a more efficient/comprehensive LOS tool will add 2 major benefits to the game:

Speeds up the decision making process making RT a more viable play option as well as reducing the time it takes to plot moves in WEGO. which leaves more time to watch replays .

A LOS tool that highlights all the grid squares on the map at once will also give the player a better way of seeing the map relief. If done correctly the player will be able to spot hills, valleys and dead spots at a glance.

Thanks for listening, what say you?

[YankeeDog]

I think some sort of toggleable terrain grid or "high relief" mode that makes it easier to see elevation changes is a great idea. People have been suggesting a feature like this since CMBO days and hopefully BFC will have the time to add a feature like this, before too long,

And I do think that some sort of improved LOS tool would be a nice addition to the next major game engine revision. The Target order works OK for now, but it's kind of slow and cumbersome to have to place a waypoint on the map every time you want to get a general idea of the LOS from that point.

However, I also don't think any LOS tool should be *too* comprehensive. A simpler, more intuitive LOS tool that gives a general idea of what can be seen from a certain point on the map would be great. But ultimately, I do feel the game should maintain the requirement that the only way to know for sure *exactly* what can be seen from a certain point is to put a unit on that point, and see what they can see...

[Fredrock1957]

Excellent idea, as long as players understand that it is a LOS and not LOF tool...

[YankeeDog]

Predicting both LOS and LOF from any given location on the map gets very tricky in CMx2 because it's actually dependent on the specific location of the eyeballs/optics for a unit (for LOS), and the exact location of the sights and gun barrel, and the ballistic path (for LOF).

So,with an infantry team, with LOS it matters where the guys are specifically within the action spot, and also whether they're standing, kneeling, or prone. With LOF it matters whether an MG is set up on a Tripod, or fired from the hip. Etc.

Further, CMx1 pixeltruppen will actively try to gain LOS/LOF to a known enemy on their own, so things can change over time. For example, soldiers just behind a crest may go to kneeling, or even stand up to try to gain LOS to an enemy beyond the crest that they can't see when prone.

And with AFVs, it actually does matter, for example, that a Sherman is significantly taller than a Stug. So a TC in a Sherman with his head out of the hatch may be able to see over an obstacle that a Stug commander can't. And the Sherman's gun may be able to fire over an obstacle that the Stug's gun can't.

So programming any kind of universal LOS tool is actually pretty complex. It's interesting to discuss what the "idea" LOS tool might be... I'm not sure myself.

[Rocky Balboa]

Good points from both but to clarify, what we are currently using today to determine LOS is actually a LOF/Targeting tool. So for the purposes of my OP and in the context of today's game they are one and the same. So I guess I should amend my OP to say LOF to avoid confusion.

Personally I think one tool could server both purposes if done correctly but the point of my OP is that it takes far too long to use the method we have currently to determine either LOS or LOF.

[Fredrock1957]

Good points from both but to clarify, what we are currently using today to determine LOS is actually a LOF/Targeting tool. So for the purposes of my OP and in the context of today's game they are one and the same. So I guess I should amend my OP to say LOF to avoid confusion.

Personally I think one tool could server both purposes if done correctly but the point of my OP is that it takes far too long to use the method we have currently to determine either LOS or LOF.

But there is the problem IMO, you can have LOS to a action spot, but not LOF to a target within that action spot... Thus there should be two tools, one for just LOS like you stated in the OP, and two should be a LOS/LOF tool, that currently exists..

[slysniper]

Good points from both but to clarify, what we are currently using today to determine LOS is actually a LOF/Targeting tool. So for the purposes of my OP and in the context of today's game they are one and the same. So I guess I should amend my OP to say LOF to avoid confusion.

Personally I think one tool could server both purposes if done correctly but the point of my OP is that it takes far too long to use the method we have currently to determine either LOS or LOF.

You guys are answering the question, what is needed is a tool that highlights the ground and enemy with the push of one button that lets you know that it has both capabilities los & lof.

So it only hightlights areas and units if both things are possible,, no point highlighting something you cannot shoot and no point in showing every possible shot location if you cannot see it.

There some more heavy calculations to bring your computers to their knees.

Nice in a dream world though. but I think that is asking a lot in this type of program, but I am not the guy that programs, so really dont know.

[A Canadian Cat]

<snip>A LOS tool that highlights all the grid squares on the map at once will also give the player a better way of seeing the map relief. If done correctly the player will be able to spot hills, valleys and dead spots at a glance.<snip>

Interesting idea but, I fear, this highlighting tool you suggest will not really be as accurate as you are hoping. Others have already mentioned the issue of relative height of vehicles and obstacles and the final position of infantry in the action square effecting what will be visible.

The most dramatic example of this is with infantry and bocage. If you give your infantry a move order to the edge of a bocage line and then test the LOS from the way point, you will find it says they will not be able to see anything on the other side (OK maybe on action spot on the other side). But once they team gets there and sets up on the bocage they can see quite well on the other side.

I think you will find that this is just one example and the tool you are suggesting will be misleading. I think the examples of this will be more numerous than we think.

[Rocky Balboa]

But there is the problem IMO, you can have LOS to a action spot, but not LOF to a target within that action spot... Thus there should be two tools, one for just LOS like you stated in the OP, and two should be a LOS/LOF tool, that currently exists..

For my purposes as long as I know I can target an action spot then I know I can at least place area fire in that location. I also must assume as most RL commanders do that if I can see then I can be seen, and If I can be seen then I can be killed. IMO the decision making process doesn’t need to go any lower than this.

If I want to plot a move then I need to know what areas of the map I can see and possibly be seen from. The targeting tool we have today works great for LOF and it does an adequate job of showing LOS thus it serves two purposes however IMO it takes far too long to use it for determining LOS.

I personally fee like all we need is a way to highlight all the action spots that can be seen by the currently selected unit with one key press or mouse click. In addition we should be able to do this from any waypoint along a movement path.

[sand digger]

What RB said in his last para ^

Tell us that can't be done, go on.

[GreenAsJade]

It might be able to be done, but I'm not sure it will solve anything.

You might not be able to see the ground at a target action spot, yet be able to see a tank when it is parked there. What do you want the tool to tell you? Will you be OK with it when you find out that you can see a tank when it told you there was no LOS to that spot?

GaJ

[Battlefront.com]

I'm afraid the hit to the framerate or a perceptible pause to display the information would result in trying to do something like what is being discussed. Imagine being on a mostly open map and using this tool. A 2000x2000m map has 62,500 Action Spots in it. You're asking the system, on the fly, to toggle graphics on/off for all of that area. Do not think that the situation of tight terrain in Normandy means this won't be an issue, because I've seen plenty of wide open maps. Arid conditions make it even more likely to happen.

I'd rather spend our time figuring out clever, practical ways to make those 62,500 or more Action Spots easier to understand in terms of terrain, elevation, etc. Due to the graphical limitations of the low res computers we all use, this is a major challenge for a game as detailed and expansive as CM. Putting in more effort there is likely to help a lot of different things, including the issues raised in this thread.

Steve

[Arm505]

I mentioned an idea somewhere else, just thought I'd ask again - how about an 'Advance to gain LOS/F' kind of movement order? ie, when given the unit would advance until it gained LOS/F to the targeted point?

That way we can position units to cover specific points/areas without micromanaging and looking over their shoulders the whole time.

[Battlefront.com]

That is akin to the CMx1 "Hull Down" order. It's definitely being considered. We don't think it's as necessary as it was in CMx1, but clearly it would be helpful sometimes for most people. Or a lot of times for some people, since this sort of thing is heavily influenced by play style.

Steve

[BadgerDog]

That is akin to the CMx1 "Hull Down" order. It's definitely being considered. We don't think it's as necessary as it was in CMx1, but clearly it would be helpful sometimes for most people. Or a lot of times for some people, since this sort of thing is heavily influenced by play style.

Steve

I'd kill, well figuratively anyway .. ... to have a standard "hull down" command to issue to a driver. In game terms, it would be clicking on a piece of ground to the front and having a "hull down move", which would cause the driver to advance until he could just see over the obstacle, then reverse down until all he could see in his driver's periscope was the grass (or other obstacle) in front of him, meaning the master weapon was pointed over the height of the obstacle ie: hull down.

That was a standard M4 CC to drive command ie: "driver advance to hull down" .. there was also a "driver advance to turret down", but the CC was required to issue a "driver halt" order as his head rose above the obstacle enough for him to view and perform SA (situational awareness) scanning the ground in front of him.

I don't know how practical or possible this is to program, but I'm enjoying the game as it is. I do spend a lot of time sitting in the driver's seat at ground level and using the mouse, simulating movement forward until I can see over the obstacle, then I mouse reverse the view and back up until I can't. The problem is that I have hard time figuring out exactly where that spot was on the map after I switch to a top down view to plot that move, so as a compromise for folks like me, it would be great to have a "mark here" command so I can easily finds that spot to plot my real move to.

Anyway, thanks for a great product and resurrecting my interest in this type of gaming. So far, dollar for dollar, it's some of the best and most inexpensive entertainment value I've found in the last few years in computer software,

Looking forward to expansion and further development ..

Regards,

Doug

[sburke]

That is akin to the CMx1 "Hull Down" order. It's definitely being considered. We don't think it's as necessary as it was in CMx1, but clearly it would be helpful sometimes for most people. Or a lot of times for some people, since this sort of thing is heavily influenced by play style.

Steve

Derek, you aren't supposed to give reasoned responses that provide information and feedback to user suggestions. You have a reputation to work on. Sheesh

[YankeeDog]

That is akin to the CMx1 "Hull Down" order. It's definitely being considered. We don't think it's as necessary as it was in CMx1, but clearly it would be helpful sometimes for most people. Or a lot of times for some people, since this sort of thing is heavily influenced by play style.

Steve

Yeah, CMx1's "Seek Hull Down Order" was very useful and a timesaver, when it worked. Most of the time, it worked as advertised, but IME, about 10% of the time you would misjudge things, and the tank would never find a hull down point. Because of the way the order was designed, this meant that the tank would continue to advance towards the target point, which was often disastrous. As a result, I usually didn't use it and relied on my own judgement instead.

I'm all for some kind of "Seek LOS" order in CMx2 (or, probably more useful, "Seek LOF"), simply as a timesaver because it would save me lots of time crawling along a planned line of advance at camera level 1, looking for the right point to deploy. But it is critical that it's done right, because if it's unreliable at all, I'll probably usually revert to just doing things "the old fashioned way", and the order will just waste valuable space on the UI.

[Rocky Balboa]

It might be able to be done, but I'm not sure it will solve anything.

You might not be able to see the ground at a target action spot, yet be able to see a tank when it is parked there. What do you want the tool to tell you?

My answer to your question is I want a tool that will give us the same information that we have today but gives it to me a lot faster without having to click all over the map trying to determine where possible danger areas might be.

Will you be OK with it when you find out that you can see a tank when it told you there was no LOS to that spot?

Yes I will be ok with it because if something shows up during the course of the turn then the tact AI should handle the situation as it does today. Currently if I use the target tool and it tells me that I can’t see a certain spot on the map then I have to make an assumption that any enemy unit in that spot can’t se me as well. I know its not absolute, but I have no control over what might happen once I hit the red button. That’s the nature of warfare and I accept that but I’m just offering suggestions on how we can speed up the decision making process with one command instead of dragging the target line all over the map before plotting a move. There must be a better solution.

Maybe I’m in the minority here because I know many play RT and perhaps don’t over analyze every move but for me it’s a big issue.

[smbecket]

That is akin to the CMx1 "Hull Down" order. It's definitely being considered. We don't think it's as necessary as it was in CMx1, but clearly it would be helpful sometimes for most people. Or a lot of times for some people, since this sort of thing is heavily influenced by play style.

Steve

Steve, I am somewhat surprised by your response and this entire discussion. You have always stated that BF strives for realism and yet the present system where a player can highlight every waypoint and then see general targeting info all around from that point is far from realistic! The old "Hull Down" command was a short, specific and realistic order for the tank crew to find a tactically beneficial position. I use the present system because it is there and because a flat two-dimensional monitor can never provide the detailed information that our stereoscopic Mark 1 eyeballs can, but it is very unrealistic. Please bring back the "Hull Down" command and limit the targeting to a units present position. And at the same time allow "targeting" for vehicles such as trucks and HTs without a gunner that presently can not do it at all. This request will probably not be favorably received by many but it would be far more realistic.

[hoolaman]

The problem is that I have hard time figuring out exactly where that spot was on the map after I switch to a top down view to plot that move, so as a compromise for folks like me, it would be great to have a "mark here" command so I can easily finds that spot to plot my real move to.

You probably know this but in case you or others do not, you can trace LOS from any waypoint you plot. The line doesn't trace from the waypoint though, it emanates from the unit itself, but the LOS info is correct.

As for whether that is realistic, well it is my view that WEGO orders are a projection forward in time of actions that a unit will take during the turn so it isn't that unrealistic to get a LOS trace from where a unit *will* be.

A system instantly highlighting every point that can see you is far more unrealistic from a FOW perspective imo.

[Erwin]

While I still enjoy CM1 games, after the first few (disastrous) times I never used the hull-down command again. It's not hard to eye-ball hull-down position after a bit of experience (in CM1). It is a lot harder in CM2 I agree. But, given that an automated hull-down command can result in nasty consequences...

There are so many limitations in a 2D screen display of a 3D environment that it's never concerned me that one can get LOS from every waypoint. It gives back a little of what the screen limitations take away - including the fact that it is hard to even figure out what terrain a unit may be in since CM2 does not provide an easy to see terrain base color like CM1 did.

When all is said and done all the abstractions are needed to make CM a superb playable entertainment GAME. Many times the comments here make one think that we're discussing a multi-zillion dollar DoD simulation that is supposed to be accurate and realistic in every detail.

We are VERY fortunate to have the CM series and a developer who is dedicated to continuing this sort of quality when there is so much more money in "selling out" and going to RPS or multiplayer RT games which do not require any great AI.

My greatest concern for CM is that one day the the developers decide they need to make more $ to send their kids to college and save for retirement. To avoid, or at least delay that day when BF turns to more commercial projects, we need to start chanting that they never acquire girlfriends, wives or kids...

[Rocky Balboa]

I'm afraid the hit to the framerate or a perceptible pause to display the information would result in trying to do something like what is being discussed. Imagine being on a mostly open map and using this tool. A 2000x2000m map has 62,500 Action Spots in it. You're asking the system, on the fly, to toggle graphics on/off for all of that area. Do not think that the situation of tight terrain in Normandy means this won't be an issue, because I've seen plenty of wide open maps. Arid conditions make it even more likely to happen.

Steve

A hit to the frame rate is one thing, a perceptible pause is quite another. The way I look at it is the amount of time it takes me to accumulate the same amount of information with the currently available tools. For me it doesn’t have to be instantaneous, just faster than I can do it manually. Which I’m sure the currently available hardware will have no problem achieving. It’s all relative I suppose ..... Oh by the way, did I mention that I am really enjoying the game ... Where's the Brits???

[StellarRat]

I asked for this very thing months ago and everyone poo-poo'ed the idea. I don't really care if I can see iNTO terrain I just want know if I can even see the spot at all.

[StellarRat]

A hit to the frame rate is one thing, a perceptible pause is quite another. The way I look at it is the amount of time it takes me to accumulate the same amount of information with the currently available tools. For me it doesn’t have to be instantaneous, just faster than I can do it manually. Which I’m sure the currently available hardware will have no problem achieving. It’s all relative I suppose ..... Oh by the way, did I mention that I am really enjoying the game ... Where's the Brits???

Isn't calculating LOS/LOF constantly anyway? It has to do that for the spotting AI to work. Besides if its something that takes a button push the players can use it understanding It might pause the game. Personally I'd probably use it a lot at the setup phase to get the lay of the land and not much after that.

[Broadsword56]

A system instantly highlighting every point that can see you is far more unrealistic from a FOW perspective imo.

if you could hit an "area LOS" button from any action square on the map and see a shaded overlay, revealing every action square that it could see/be seen from (not revealing any units or contacts, just visible terrain), that would be a huge help. The Panther games (Battles from the Bulge, etc) have had that feature and it's a great player aid. But it's a big hit on computer power, I understand. Whether it's unrealistic is open to debate. In one sense it is, but OTOH it restores some of the situational awareness in 3D terrain that we lose by not being physically in the environment, having poor depth perception on a computer monitor, and not having good contour maps either.