Vehicles and elevation changes

[Chris21wen]

In the pic I want to move the h/t up the road but I'm told the elevation exceeds the vehicles capabilities. That's OK in itself but why is the game highlighting hexes in locations the vehicle can't get too because of this. This isn't an isolated case.

[berto]

Something we will look into. Not so easy to fix.

[Jason Petho]

It depends on the map.

Elevation crossings over 50 metres difference are not possible with vehicles.

In the case above, the map creator made an error or that the scenario designer intended that to be the "end of the road"

[Crossroads]

What is the scenario with the issue, Chris? I'll have a look

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

What is the scenario with the issue, Chris? I'll have a look

Retake mount herman

[Crossroads]

Thanks, I'll check it this evening

[Crossroads]

Chris: having asked about this I can confirm those elevations were designed to stop vehicles advancing further. There's several of them actually.

You can use hotkey "." to have the elevation values show on map when figuring out your route of advance. See below:



PS: Those are paths, or an unpaved road leading to a path. The paved road as well the unpaved road on the left (not visible here) are navigable.
PPS: Hope I did not put any spoilers out here [:D]

[Crossroads]

When I played this some time ago I thought I'd just bulldoze my way in using the main road. It did not end that spectacularly tbh. It got quite bloody rather quick though [8D]

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

Chris: having asked about this I can confirm those elevations were designed to stop vehicles advancing further. There's several of them actually.

You can use hotkey "." to have the elevation values show on map when figuring out your route of advance. See below:



PS: Those are paths, or an unpaved road leading to a path. The paved road as well the unpaved road on the left (not visible here) are navigable.
PPS: Hope I did not put any spoilers out here [:D]

I think you missed the point. I understand that but when you use the H key to highlight were they can move too it indicates they can or more precisely they should be able to move though the hex side.

I've also noticed another small 'quirk' with the H key. If you select two units the move to highlight always selects the greatest movement ability of the two. For it should be the one with the smallest movement.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Chris H

I think you missed the point. I understand that but when you use the H key to highlight were they can move too it indicates they can or more precisely they should be able to move though the hex side.

Problem acknowledged in Post #2 above.

I've also noticed another small 'quirk' with the H key. If you select two units the move to highlight always selects the greatest movement ability of the two. For it should be the one with the smallest movement.

Very difficult to implement, since there are so many factors involved in so many combinations and directions, it would be hard to implement in the code a comparison between the two (much less three or four or ... however many selected units) reachable hexes sets to determine which is "smallest". Effectively, the H range indication only works (mostly) well with a single unit selected.

[berto]

About the two (or more) stacked units:

Consider the case of a truck unit stacked with an amphibious unit at water's edge. The amphibious unit can move inland a bit, but can traverse the water widely. The truck can move well inland, but can't traverse the water at all. They will have two different reachable hexes sets extending in opposite directions. Which is "smallest"? Very hard to determine, much more so to code.

There are so many hex terrains and hex sides, and so many units with so many different movement characteristics and special abilities. Let's not forget fatigue, and saving APs for firing/moving. And so on.

The problem only becomes worse as more than two units are selected.

No, the ReacHable hexes highlight really only works well with one unit selected.