Currently airplane losses on the intelligence screen are always 100% correct, despite fog of war. I would like to see this changed. It should be a cumulative summary of every combat summary's air loss report.
Yamamoto
Air losses on intelligence screen should be affected by fog of war.
Moderators: Joel Billings, Tankerace, siRkid
-
Howard Mitchell
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:41 am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Air losses on intelligence screen should be affected by fog of war.
Originally posted by Yamamoto
It should be a cumulative summary of every combat summary's air loss report.
Yamamoto
...but show correct losses for your side.
While the battles the British fight may differ in the widest possible ways, they invariably have two common characteristics – they are always fought uphill and always at the junction of two or more map sheets.
General Sir William Slim
General Sir William Slim
You are quite correct, I use that report to see just how creamed enemy CV's got in the last round to judge whether to break off or give chase!
Knowing that 64 enemy dive bombers got shot down last turn really encourages one to press home the attack since you know that there is little left to toss your way.
Knowing that 64 enemy dive bombers got shot down last turn really encourages one to press home the attack since you know that there is little left to toss your way.
-
bradfordkay
- Posts: 8602
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
- Location: Olympia, WA
If FOW is implemented correctly, your pilots should be claiming much better results than they are actually achieveing. Some of those 64 dive bombers may be back on their carrier loading up for another run at you. Likewise, that carrier your pilots claimed to sink may be only slightly damaged and ready for battle the next day. I've been playing the game with those thoughts in mind, so maybe I'm being far more cautious than the average UV player....
fair winds,
Brad
Brad
Brad,
If you are just looking at the combat report, conservative is the way to go. But if you go to the intel screen, there are no exaggerations, no pilot errors, just plain plane losses. The math will be exact and I have to agree, that FOW should apply to the intel screen as well.
If you are just looking at the combat report, conservative is the way to go. But if you go to the intel screen, there are no exaggerations, no pilot errors, just plain plane losses. The math will be exact and I have to agree, that FOW should apply to the intel screen as well.
x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"
This is a worthwhile concern. Using the accurate information from the Intel screen, a player who tracks the losses every turn, can effectively deduct the enemy’s losses and gain an edge in decision making - just like Mr. Frag explained.
This undermines the whole concept of fog of war. Why have a feature that can be bypassed with such an easy trick?
This undermines the whole concept of fog of war. Why have a feature that can be bypassed with such an easy trick?
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
I tend to agree with what's been suggested here, but (and this is a big but, just like Jennifer Lopez's), once you insert fog of war into this screen, haven't you destroyed its usefulness and opened the door to eliminating it altogether?
Where do you get reliable information about anything, then? Maybe the whole system of reported losses needs to be re-thought all the way from combat screens through combat results through air losses through sunk ships through ground losses through ... et cetera ...
Where do you get reliable information about anything, then? Maybe the whole system of reported losses needs to be re-thought all the way from combat screens through combat results through air losses through sunk ships through ground losses through ... et cetera ...
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
Posted by Pasternakski
Butt.....
I find I am using the air loss table as much for checking my own losses as that of the enemies.
If I stage a long range strike that involves 10 squadrons, a quick check of the table (the following turn) allows me to decide whether the non-operational losses at that distance justify further strikes.
The same for my recon/search assets. A sudden increase in the loss rate of these a/c are a sure sign that the enemy has increased his fighter activity/presence in the area (a guarrantee that he's up to no good).
I think the table would remain relevant even with FOW.
Not a show-stopper either way, just think its strange to know exactly how much your enemy is hurting in one area but not in others.
I tend to agree with what's been suggested here, but (and this is a big but, just like Jennifer Lopez's), once you insert fog of war into this screen, haven't you destroyed its usefulness and opened the door to eliminating it altogether?
Butt.....
I find I am using the air loss table as much for checking my own losses as that of the enemies.
If I stage a long range strike that involves 10 squadrons, a quick check of the table (the following turn) allows me to decide whether the non-operational losses at that distance justify further strikes.
The same for my recon/search assets. A sudden increase in the loss rate of these a/c are a sure sign that the enemy has increased his fighter activity/presence in the area (a guarrantee that he's up to no good).
I think the table would remain relevant even with FOW.
Not a show-stopper either way, just think its strange to know exactly how much your enemy is hurting in one area but not in others.
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
drink more beer.
Why should we get reliable information about enemy losses?
As other writers said:
Intelligence about AC losses is sometimes just too much... Have to admit that some days ago I was wondering how my CV battle was proceeding... Then I noticed that US suffered loss of 140 carrier planes(2 CV's). My planes did shoot down about 80...
My conclusion was:
Intelligence screen confirmed that neither of enemy CV's was operational and thus it was 100% safe for me to start hunting both crippled CV's. I had scored quite a good deal of hits, but couldn't be sure about effects because FOW.
I would consider this much more than just useful...
As other writers said:
Intelligence about AC losses is sometimes just too much... Have to admit that some days ago I was wondering how my CV battle was proceeding... Then I noticed that US suffered loss of 140 carrier planes(2 CV's). My planes did shoot down about 80...
My conclusion was:
Intelligence screen confirmed that neither of enemy CV's was operational and thus it was 100% safe for me to start hunting both crippled CV's. I had scored quite a good deal of hits, but couldn't be sure about effects because FOW.
I would consider this much more than just useful...
Originally posted by pasternakski
I tend to agree with what's been suggested here, but (and this is a big but, just like Jennifer Lopez's), once you insert fog of war into this screen, haven't you destroyed its usefulness and opened the door to eliminating it altogether?
Where do you get reliable information about anything, then? Maybe the whole system of reported losses needs to be re-thought all the way from combat screens through combat results through air losses through sunk ships through ground losses through ... et cetera ...
Enemy Losses Only
No, not your losses, enemy losses. I think the general view is the intel screen should accurately reflect your losses, but fog of war for your opponents losses. How often are you going to know that your opponent lost x planes on recon, or crashed at sea returning from a long range bombing mission. If you study it, this screen removes a lot of the guess-work about what you are facing.
Later,
FC3(SW) Batch
USS Iowa
FC3(SW) Batch
USS Iowa
-
bradfordkay
- Posts: 8602
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
- Location: Olympia, WA
-
Hoplosternum
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 8:39 pm
- Location: Romford, England
Well I like the screen the way it is 
I know it can sometimes give you vital intelligence such as CV sinkings, but remember if any of their planes could have got to bases you would not get this. Nor if it occured after a round or two of big CV - CV combats that can be very bloody with the frail 1E bombers and ferocious flak. You may only sink an 'extra' dozen or so planes per carrier. Besides even with the Fog of War you usually have a good idea if at least you have put a CV out of the fight. They only need a total of 50 Sys and Float damage to stop all air missions. I am not sure this is a serious enough breech of the Fog of War to warrent it getting the axe
After all it is a very interesting screen You can follow how well you have done over all and on particullar days. It's not perhaps the most realistic of things but I think this game already has Fog of War in spades. You don't know whether the combat reports are accurate, where the enemies task forces are with accuracy, or what exactly they contain usually, nor where all his squadrens are or which ones, or how combat worthy they are, what the weather is going to be and where etc. etc. etc. I think we can get away with being able to see after the event how many planes went down that day. Finding out at the end of the game that really you were or were not doing as well as you thought over PM six months of game time ago would just not be the same.
I shall now don my flame retardent suite and just hope the moderators do not expel me from the forum for non hardcore grognard views
I know it can sometimes give you vital intelligence such as CV sinkings, but remember if any of their planes could have got to bases you would not get this. Nor if it occured after a round or two of big CV - CV combats that can be very bloody with the frail 1E bombers and ferocious flak. You may only sink an 'extra' dozen or so planes per carrier. Besides even with the Fog of War you usually have a good idea if at least you have put a CV out of the fight. They only need a total of 50 Sys and Float damage to stop all air missions. I am not sure this is a serious enough breech of the Fog of War to warrent it getting the axe
After all it is a very interesting screen
You can follow how well you have done over all and on particullar days. It's not perhaps the most realistic of things but I think this game already has Fog of War in spades. You don't know whether the combat reports are accurate, where the enemies task forces are with accuracy, or what exactly they contain usually, nor where all his squadrens are or which ones, or how combat worthy they are, what the weather is going to be and where etc. etc. etc. I think we can get away with being able to see after the event how many planes went down that day. Finding out at the end of the game that really you were or were not doing as well as you thought over PM six months of game time ago would just not be the same.I shall now don my flame retardent suite and just hope the moderators do not expel me from the forum for non hardcore grognard views
Definately agree to
CAN THE PILOT KILL MESSAGES.
They get very annoying, simply because in a big airbattle they take forever to scroll across. It doesn't really add anything to the combat report. I can certainly check the status of my pilots on the intel screen.
Definately can kill messages also.
-F-
CAN THE PILOT KILL MESSAGES.
They get very annoying, simply because in a big airbattle they take forever to scroll across. It doesn't really add anything to the combat report. I can certainly check the status of my pilots on the intel screen.
Definately can kill messages also.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
Originally posted by Feinder
Definately agree to
CAN THE PILOT KILL MESSAGES.
-F-
No. I like the pilot kill messages. If you don't want to see them you can press the F1 key and they will scroll off the screen at blinding speed. I used to press escape key to do this but that caused me to miss the next report. My thanks again to whoever it was that posted the F1 key info.
Yamamoto