Spotting Questions

[choppinlt]

I posed this in a different thread, but I think it got buried. I discovered that the 3 different overlays to show what a unit can see sometimes yields different results. Some show vision into hexes that aren't shown in the others, and others show different spotting numbers in the same hex. Is this supposed to be this way? I have circled a few notable areas to compare to the other pics to illustrate what I see. I will add that it's mostly Unit LOS in comparison to the other two that differ. I am using version 6819.



Using All LOS


SOP Range


Unit LOS

[WildCatNL]

Thanks for spotting (duh) this.

The Unit LOS and Unit SOP should list the same visibility values for each of the hexes that the unit have line-of-sight into.

The (Multi-) Unit LOS (aka All LOS) lists the maximum visibility value from all units in each hex. In the given example, it's the selected M1 Abrams with a great sensor package that will achieve the best visibility in most hexes, except for a few where other friendly units offer better visibility.

The discrepancy between the Unit LOS and Unit SOP visibility values is unwanted. The cause is a different policy for choosing the sensor (detection vs identification, sometimes resulting in different sensor - thermal vs optical for the Abrams) to pick the LOS values for, which we'll fix. This has no consequences for gameplay though.

[Comcikda]

Thanks for spotting (duh) this.

The Unit LOS and Unit SOP should list the same visibility values for each of the hexes that the unit have line-of-sight into.

The (Multi-) Unit LOS (aka All LOS) lists the maximum visibility value from all units in each hex. In the given example, it's the selected M1 Abrams with a great sensor package that will achieve the best visibility in most hexes, except for a few where other friendly units offer better visibility.

The discrepancy between the Unit LOS and Unit SOP visibility values is unwanted. The cause is a different policy for choosing the sensor (detection vs identification, sometimes resulting in different sensor - thermal vs optical for the Abrams) to pick the LOS values for, which we'll fix. This has no consequences for gameplay though.

By the way, I think it's unnecessary to show the value of LOS, it's perfectly fine to use different colors depending on the visibility - what's the point of 61% and 69% for the player?

[choppinlt]

Thanks for spotting (duh) this.

The Unit LOS and Unit SOP should list the same visibility values for each of the hexes that the unit have line-of-sight into.

The (Multi-) Unit LOS (aka All LOS) lists the maximum visibility value from all units in each hex. In the given example, it's the selected M1 Abrams with a great sensor package that will achieve the best visibility in most hexes, except for a few where other friendly units offer better visibility.

The discrepancy between the Unit LOS and Unit SOP visibility values is unwanted. The cause is a different policy for choosing the sensor (detection vs identification, sometimes resulting in different sensor - thermal vs optical for the Abrams) to pick the LOS values for, which we'll fix. This has no consequences for gameplay though.

Thanks WildCatNL for the explanation, and I understand. While I wanted to bring up the number differential, the biggest issue I see is that there are some instances of differing vis in a hex. For instance All LOS and SOP range show vis into the Pautzfeld hex (with an 11 factor), yet the Unit LOS show NO VIS in Pautzfeld at all. So which is correct? Regnitz is another hex with differing vis/no vis.

I ran a test scenario where Pautzfeld had a full company of T-80s and the M-1s were sitting in the same spot as the pics. I ran several turns and they never spotted and fired at each other. Then I ran a company of BTR's down the road back and forth, the M-1s saw and engaged. WIth the M-1's exposing themselves the T-80's fired at the M-1's. All of this makes sense to me and is fine, but the curious part was that the M-1's never returned fire after a dozen iterations. Based on this experiment and the differing LOS info above it appears that the T-80's in Paulzfeld can engage those M-1's with 100% impunity despite being within sensor range and weapon range. Is that supposed to be that way? I fully understand that the M-1's may not always get the chance to return fire under the circumstances, but the experiment yielded zero fire at the T-80s.

[WildCatNL]

Thanks WildCatNL for the explanation, and I understand. While I wanted to bring up the number differential, the biggest issue I see is that there are some instances of differing vis in a hex. For instance All LOS and SOP range show vis into the Pautzfeld hex (with an 11 factor), yet the Unit LOS show NO VIS in Pautzfeld at all. So which is correct? Regnitz is another hex with differing vis/no vis.

SOP Range and All LOS reflect the maximum visibility (trying to _detect_ hostiles). Right now the Unit LOS view uses more demanding check (trying to _identify_ hostiles), which is the source of the discrepancy. A fix has been committed, will be part of the January update.
Again, for line-of-sight / line-of-fire queries in spotting and combat, the line of sight is based on detection so the discrepancy doesn't play a role. (Being able to classify and identify will improve the aim, but not being able to identify does not exclude detection).

I ran a test scenario where Pautzfeld had a full company of T-80s and the M-1s were sitting in the same spot as the pics. I ran several turns and they never spotted and fired at each other. Then I ran a company of BTR's down the road back and forth, the M-1s saw and engaged. WIth the M-1's exposing themselves the T-80's fired at the M-1's. All of this makes sense to me and is fine, but the curious part was that the M-1's never returned fire after a dozen iterations. Based on this experiment and the differing LOS info above it appears that the T-80's in Paulzfeld can engage those M-1's with 100% impunity despite being within sensor range and weapon range. Is that supposed to be that way? I fully understand that the M-1's may not always get the chance to return fire under the circumstances, but the experiment yielded zero fire at the T-80s.

I expect this to be unrelated to line-of-sight, and more related to SOP, but cannot tell without having access the saved game (which you might have posted already - apologies in that case - someone else in our team must have looked into that).

[choppinlt]

SOP Range and All LOS reflect the maximum visibility (trying to _detect_ hostiles). Right now the Unit LOS view uses more demanding check (trying to _identify_ hostiles), which is the source of the discrepancy. A fix has been committed, will be part of the January update.
Again, for line-of-sight / line-of-fire queries in spotting and combat, the line of sight is based on detection so the discrepancy doesn't play a role. (Being able to classify and identify will improve the aim, but not being able to identify does not exclude detection).

All of this sounds good. I'm just trying to make sense of everything based on what I have seen in the game and what you have described.

I expect this to be unrelated to line-of-sight, and more related to SOP, but cannot tell without having access the saved game (which you might have posted already - apologies in that case - someone else in our team must have looked into that).

SOP was not the issue as I had set that all up in the editor to avoid an oversight during the playtest. BUT this is where I will eat some crow and admit that this game has made a liar of me. Before I responded to the latest message I played the test scenario again...and for some reason (for the first time in over a dozen chances) they traded shots at each other much like I would have thought. I re-ran the scenario yet again and they responded against each other again! So here I thought I had uncovered an issue, and it appears not. I'm not sure what the issue was/has been, but it does seem to be OK especially combined with your explanation. Consider this case closed, and I will thank you again!