Page 1 of 1

Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:21 pm
by fbastos
Just noticed that my combat reports state 10 aircrafts lost for me, while I know I lost only 4 aircrafts (that's what shows on the intelligence screen and I compared the pilot roster (so I deduced the "roasted" pilots ... hehe... sick joke).

It's fair to fog the enemy losses, but to fog one's own losses? I should know when my aircraft has been shot down, right?

Or am I missing something here?

Regards,
F.

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:27 pm
by Bodhi
ORIGINAL: fbastos
It's fair to fog the enemy losses, but to fog one's own losses? I should know when my aircraft has been shot down, right?

Shared combat report for both sides, hence the FOW version is seen?

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:28 pm
by Jaws_slith
ORIGINAL: fbastos

Just noticed that my combat reports state 10 aircrafts lost for me, while I know I lost only 4 aircrafts (that's what shows on the intelligence screen and I compared the pilot roster (so I deduced the "roasted" pilots ... hehe... sick joke).

It's fair to fog the enemy losses, but to fog one's own losses? I should know when my aircraft has been shot down, right?

Or am I missing something here?

Regards,
F.

Agree 100%

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:41 pm
by MadDawg
Yeah, FOW is applied to both sides of the conflict which is just confusing...to make it worse the combat animation, which also has FOW applied to it, give different results from that we see in the combat report.

To be honest Id really like an OPTION to turn off FOW for Air (and ground) combat reports so at least we would know how many of our own planes and troops were taken out. At this scale knowing our enemies losses more accurately really isnt going to make a huge difference in strategic descision making yet could really help players in many ways, including learning the game and the realities of ground combat which is currently impossible to track losses for. Besides, we already have 100% accurate info in the intel screen, so why not the reports.

Dawg

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:56 pm
by hithere
i thought the sig ops was subject to FOW as well....and kinda off the subject...but does anyone use the "Radio trans detected from ... "? I was trying to fig if i could really get anything of use but i really am not.

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:26 am
by Williamb
Radio trans detected from ... "? I was trying to fig if i could really get anything of use but i really am not.

I was just wondering if that is only letting you know that said units are now appearing on your map.

say I detect radio transmitions from group in Saigon. If I check my map they are now there wereas before they werent.

not sure of this just asking

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:42 am
by Bodhi
ORIGINAL: William Amos
I was just wondering if that is only letting you know that said units are now appearing on your map.

I believe new unit arrival should show on the "in game" operation report panel. These aren't included in the operation report text file as the one file is used by both sides.

BTW, there are 2 sigintel reports, one for each side, so you should be looking at the one that tells you about your opponents activity.[;)]

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:51 am
by irishman
ORIGINAL: Bodhi
ORIGINAL: William Amos
I was just wondering if that is only letting you know that said units are now appearing on your map.

I believe new unit arrival should show on the "in game" operation report panel. These aren't included in the operation report text file as the one file is used by both sides.

BTW, there are 2 sigintel reports, one for each side, so you should be looking at the one that tells you about your opponents activity.[;)]


2 sigintel reports???
Sigintel on the Japanese side is utterly uselssssssssss!
Report from tokyo. Big deal! worthless info!.
Nobody on the Jap side uses sigint (prove me wrong!)

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 2:14 am
by Bodhi
ORIGINAL: irishman
2 sigintel reports???
Sigintel on the Japanese side is utterly uselssssssssss!
Report from tokyo. Big deal! worthless info!.
Nobody on the Jap side uses sigint (prove me wrong!)

Here's the first Allied sig intel report I laid my hands on.

Might be useless to you, not to me. [;)]

SIG INT REPORT FOR 12/08/41

8th Mongolian Cavalry Division is located at 59,25.
Radio transmissions detected at 83,84.
Radio transmissions detected at Songkhia.
52nd Naval Guard Unit is located at Kwajalein.
6th Construction Battalion is located at Tsitsihar.
Radio transmissions detected at Hiroshima/Kure.
15th Aviation Rgt is located at Camranh Bay.
Chichijima Fortress is located at Niigata.
18th Aviation Rgt is located at Taan.
119th IJA Base Force is located at Bien Hoa.
132522 men are based at Camranh Bay.
15th AA Regiment is located at Nagoya.
12th Heavy AA Battalion is located at Nagoya.
Radio transmissions detected at Songkhia.
4th Tank Regiment is located at Pescadores.
1st Tank Regiment is located at Bangkok.
Radio transmissions detected at Aparri.
68th Construction Battalion is located at Hamamatsu.
6590 men are based at Inch'on.

and the Japanese one for the same day

SIG INT REPORT FOR 12/08/41

Radio transmissions detected at 37,58.
Radio transmissions detected at 67,31.
Radio transmissions detected at Seattle.
Radio transmissions detected at Canton Island.
Radio transmissions detected at Pamakasan.

Not as much information, but look at the date. Still I'd say it was better than useless. [;)]

I use it when I play either side. QED, you're proved wrong.[:'(]

RE: Uh? Shouldn't I know my losses on combat reports?

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 5:11 am
by fbastos
Radio transmissions detected at Seattle.

Hah... very useful to know that there is someone using a radio in Seattle! [:)]

Regards,
F.