Change In Visibility

[DRG]

In this case if the trees in 50,25 were removed you would see a two to three hex wide swath of ground all the way to the road and if you added a different set of trees to that hex you wouldn't see anything beyond the trees in probably 99 cases in 100 but this set in that location on that map the game has allowed limited LOS and because the LOS isn't good enough to "light up" a solid line of hexes the game has given this because there is no way , from that angle, with the limitations of hexes, to "connect the dots". If the sighting unit was in hex 48,25 looking "east" a solid line of hexes would be visible as being in LOS but being in 49,24 looking at that angle that's all the game will give you BECAUSE the LOS though that set of trees is allowing a glimpse of terrain beyond them .

The bottom line is the hex grid is the limiting factor here. There is not enough LOS though the trees to justify anything but a single line of hexes visible from that position but there is no way to string together a single line of hexes with LOS from the viewing unit to the road without creating a crazy zig zag of hexes that go beyond the allowed LOS so it skips.


Don

[Mobhack]

As DRG says.

The LOS code has not changed since the SSI original Steel Panthers game back in the 90s. Ditto for micro smoke. There has been no need to fiddle with such fundamental code whatsoever. It works for a hex-based universe.

So SP uses it, we use it and presumably WoW (which I believe you said you have played for years) also uses that basic unchanged piece of code.

So I am wondering how you have just managed to find out that there are "edge" conditions when a unit is fired on, is suppressed, especially around cover such as trees and buildings or down draws such as streams and roads through woods.

It is entirely possible for an enemy unit to have an LOS to you but for your unit not to be able to trace one back to him on the extreme edge of an LOS fan - he may be more experienced and less suppressed, or have moved less hexes etc. so he can see that little bit better that you. Or in MBT, he may have better night vision gear than your unit (less of a factor in WW2).

Any new smoke added to the map from bombardments or exchanges of direct fire or burning bits of foliage or wrecked vehicles will dynamically change the LOS while it lasts.

So absolutely nothing new here, its been that way since the 1990s in all games using the SP engine.

Andy

[Warmonger]

Interesting. In WAW I never encountered the situation where a unit lost sighting of a target during a turn, that's why I thought there was a problem. I don't know if it's just luck or if they disabled the micro-smoke logic.

Anyway, thanks for the info.

[gila]

Originally Posted by Warmonger

Interesting. In WAW I never encountered the situation where a unit lost sighting of a target during a turn, that's why I thought there was a problem. I don't know if it's just luck or if they disabled the micro-smoke logic.

I think you are trying to compare two totally different games to each other,yes they are simular but very different on many important points too many to decribe here.

Here's what you should do,,forget what you learned on WaW, and focus on learning the SPWW2 way,b/c otherwise you are just going to confuse yourself and make nonexistant problem reports.

[gila]

@warmonger

You seem to have so many petty issues with SPWW2.

I'd have too also agree with Imp, this is getting to borderline flaming,or peristant whining.

You can make your choice,like it or leave it

[Mobhack]

A) they are units, not terrain

B) some are big and stand out, others are sunk into the landscape (photos are simply for illustration). Size is important - but vehicles are not big enough to block LOS and forts are simply a species of immobile vehicle.

C) None of them are 50 metres by 50 metres, remember that a hex is half a football pitch.

If a scenario designer wants a super-large "fortress" of the Krak des Chevaliers type, then he can raise the terrain height or use other scenario map editing tricks.

Andy

[jivemi]

Just had a close call. I was gonna bother you about how come a couple of my Polish tankettes wouldn't fire at German groundpounders. Like, come on, there's a line of sight and there's ammo, but they won't fire! It turned out the two tanky-wanks in question had run out of HE, so no wonder ...

[Warmonger]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

C) None of them are 50 metres by 50 metres, remember that a hex is half a football pitch.

Andy

Normal houses aren't anywhere 50 X 50 metres either but they block LOS in the game. Looks like you're stuck with an original SP programming decision as to how to handle fortifications. Since it's pretty basic I don't expect anything can be done about it.

I just wonder why they didn't treat fortifications as buildings. When a unit is positioned in a building it provides them with protection. Was it that they needed to treat the walls as armor with differential protection from different directions?

[RightDeve]

Originally Posted by Warmonger

Normal houses aren't anywhere 50 X 50 metres either but they block LOS in the game. Looks like you're stuck with an original SP programming decision as to how to handle fortifications. Since it's pretty basic I don't expect anything can be done about it.

I just wonder why they didn't treat fortifications as buildings. When a unit is positioned in a building it provides them with protection. Was it that they needed to treat the walls as armor with differential protection from different directions?

It's very unfortunate to say that Don and Andy are stuck with SP programming decision regarding this so-called LOS. No they are not.
You just need to have a certain level of philosophical thinking to understand the nuts and bolts of this game.
A single hex of an urban terrain, that is, what you perceive as a hex of a house, can not be perceived as a mere single house. No. It is an urban hex, and as such, it may mean a cluster of houses, or a 50 meter house, or whatever. It's an urban hex. Simple as that.

[DRG]

Do buildings have weapons slots ? Do buildings allow armour to be added ?

When you answer those questions you'll know why they didn't treat fortifications as buildings

As for......

"Looks like you're stuck with an original SP programming decision as to how to handle fortifications. Since it's pretty basic I don't expect anything can be done about it."

....... we don't see this as a "problem" that needs to be resolved.



Don