Petition: Stop Fog-of-War for friendly units when playing vs AI

[Don Bowen]

Actually, looking at the save posted in the Tech Support forum, I do not think I understand the issue.

Can some one please state the perceived problem for me? "Naval" only, as I only handle those issues.

[Zebedee]

ORIGINAL: fbs
I also appreciate where you're coming from, but the way I see it it's no a matter of way of playing. It's a matter of realism: it makes no sense that the commander of an air group doesn't know how many aircrafts he lost: he can count how many aircraft are in his airfield at any moment. I
Cheers! [:D]
fbs

My elderly eyes may be playing tricks on me, but doesn't every squadron display daily losses and cause as well as keeping track of total losses? [&:] This information is available on each individual squadron's screen (see pages 143 and 144 of the manual for where to find this info on the screen).

In any case, I'll bow out here as it's obvious there may be a bug which Don Bowen is trying to track down and I can't assist with finding it right now.

All the best,

Zeb

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Actually, looking at the save posted in the Tech Support forum, I do not think I understand the issue.

Can some one please state the perceived problem for me? "Naval" only, as I only handle those issues.

The naval problem is that AMc Condor was sunk without being involved in any combat in the combat report, or in any attack on operational report.

Hmm... perhaps that's actually an Aerial issue, given that it was sunk by a bomb?

Thanks,
fbs

[bradfordkay]

"Friendly air losses will be known with certainty once the squadron returns so it seems to me freindly air losses should be accurate."

The problem is that the combat report is supposed to be the same for both sides, isn't it? Thus the FOW on both sides units in the combat report.

You have to look at the units afterwards to see their real status. SAIEW.

The problem of the search plane attacks on shipping not being reported in the Ops report is a different matter. This should be addressed if found to be repeatable.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: fbs

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Actually, looking at the save posted in the Tech Support forum, I do not think I understand the issue.

Can some one please state the perceived problem for me? "Naval" only, as I only handle those issues.

The naval problem is that AMc Condor was sunk without being involved in any combat in the combat report, or in any attack on operational report.

Hmm... perhaps that's actually an Aerial issue, given that it was sunk by a bomb?

Thanks,
fbs

I do believe this issue was addressed in the patch. It's actually not "naval" but results from air attack. The save is from pre-patch. Does the issue still exists with the beta patch?

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"Friendly air losses will be known with certainty once the squadron returns so it seems to me freindly air losses should be accurate."

The problem is that the combat report is supposed to be the same for both sides, isn't it? Thus the FOW on both sides units in the combat report.

Right, that's why the request for the change is when playing against the AI; there doesn't seem to be any easy way of working around that on a PBEM game.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I do believe this issue was addressed in the patch. It's actually not "naval" but results from air attack. The save is from pre-patch. Does the issue still exists with the beta patch?

Oh, that's fantastic. I didn't see that in the path list of fixes. I'll keep an eye on the gameplay after patch in to see if that happens again.

Thanks, [:D]
fbs

[jb123]

aye, outside the scope of the game. I don't want to argue, as I customer of this fine game I would prefer a switch to toggle it on off. PBEMs can work it out in house rules

[Runyon]

I'd like to add my vote to changing the way FOW works for friendly units. I lost three ships in the past two turns through mysterious attacks. The last one seemed so unlikely to be a FOW issue that I came to the boards to see if it is a bug. Apparently it is not.

For example, I just lost an AP that had been completely undamaged and was disbanded in a port. The port has good CAP, and is completely supplied and supported. There are other ships in the harbor including three task forces, and many troops in the base including AA with radar. Now I can accept that the port was attacked and I lost the ship to a 500 lb bomb, but at least I would expect somebody to get around to telling me that an attack was actually taking place. Somehow the enemy launched an airstrike on my port, sank the ship and none of the thousands of people there seemed to notice this until they found a big chunk of metal the next day, where there used to be a ship. Somehow I find this rather difficult to accept as a FOW issue.

[usersatch]

I vote that FOW remain for the Allies. I know from personal experience, that even on a micro-scale, FOW exists. As a platoon sergeant, there were times that I THOUGHT I knew what was going on with my squads, but I was dead wrong. Eventually, it was cleared up, but combat is so dynamic that by the time you figured it out, you were on to the next FOW problem. The nature of the beast.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: usersatch

I vote that FOW remain for the Allies. I know from personal experience, that even on a micro-scale, FOW exists. As a platoon sergeant, there were times that I THOUGHT I knew what was going on with my squads, but I was dead wrong. Eventually, it was cleared up, but combat is so dynamic that by the time you figured it out, you were on to the next FOW problem. The nature of the beast.

Amen. The god-like ability to click through every unit to see status is already far beyond the capabilities of 1940's era theatre commanders. The inaccuracy of FOW-impacted Combat Reporting may seem annoying, but that's the nature of war. No commander ever has a perfect handle on matters, and this feature partially replicates that fact. The people who are petitioning for complete accuracy - good intentioned though you are - simply don't see the bigger picture. Uncertainty and misinformation were a large part of the real war, and eliminating that would actually make the game LESS realistic.

[Nux Mortis]

I like the friendly FOW and want it to stay.
If it gets changed, please make it with a switch.

[JeffroK]

Another vote for it to stay, after all, you can check it at the end of the turn.

Creating a bit of suspense is good value.

[CV Zuikaku]

ORIGINAL: Runyon

I'd like to add my vote to changing the way FOW works for friendly units. I lost three ships in the past two turns through mysterious attacks. The last one seemed so unlikely to be a FOW issue that I came to the boards to see if it is a bug. Apparently it is not.

For example, I just lost an AP that had been completely undamaged and was disbanded in a port. The port has good CAP, and is completely supplied and supported. There are other ships in the harbor including three task forces, and many troops in the base including AA with radar. Now I can accept that the port was attacked and I lost the ship to a 500 lb bomb, but at least I would expect somebody to get around to telling me that an attack was actually taking place. Somehow the enemy launched an airstrike on my port, sank the ship and none of the thousands of people there seemed to notice this until they found a big chunk of metal the next day, where there used to be a ship. Somehow I find this rather difficult to accept as a FOW issue.

I can confirm that this is not remowed in latest patch. Now, some of these attacks and hits are reported in operations reports. but some are not. The only thing that changed (at least what I have noticed) is that hits on friendly subs are now reported on map. Hits on surface ships are still not reported. We do only see a bomb icon when patrol plane bombs some ship. But no hit reports. Woul'd be a really nice thing to get on map hit report like for sub. So we know that something is burning in the TF. And reduce the click-fest needed to check every TF every turn (checking ship list is nice, but not so nice when I have 50, 80 or 150 damaged ships with high sys damage- just can not remember and track every single one of them).

[oldman45]

If a switch were added, I would support it. I like the FOW as it is.

[Runyon]

Clearly there are a lot of people that fall on both sides, so a switch seems like a good compromise. It probably comes down to whether you feel this is more a simulation or a game. Even assuming real world FOW, eventually some sort of account is available of the fighting that can be studied by commanders to learn what went wrong. What kind of plane sunk the ship? Where might it have come from? What can I do differently to guard against that happening again? I'll never know the answers to these questions based on the information I get under friendly FOW.

Some form of friendly FOW makes sense from a simulation perspective, but not so much from a game perspective. In return for spending hours ordering about troops and equipment, I expect some sort of payoff in the end, namely a combat that either helps me achieve my objectives, or sets me back in that regard. If all I get in return is a notice that a ship was sunk, I begin to question the point of my efforts. If I want to spend hours moving cargo around in ships, I'd get a job at Maersk, and at least get paid for it.

[Puhis]

If some players want frinedly FOW, there really is no limit for it. Just don't watch combat replays, read any reports and check unit's status before assing orders. So anyone can have as much friendly FOW as he wants.

I really want to know what hit my ship and when. I don't mind do I get accurate combat reports or not. But when ships is damaged, I want to know it.

[Central Blue]

Not likely to get a switch if the present goal is stabilizing and bug-squashing.

Seems to me the game was designed by grognards for grognards, so FOW for friendlies it is for all of the reasons mentioned.

[fbs]

Who says the Titanic can't be rescued? This thread has risen from the cold depths of page 20. Most extraordinary.

Cheers
fbs