How to mimic "fog of war" if there is a way?
-
Example ideas;
1- Getting an estimate of enemy strenghts rather than seeing the exact enemy numbers like not seeing 4 enemy infantry instead 1-10 infantry.
2- Making calculator less accurate.
Just like any of them.
-
@schulz
Try playing against the AI with pieces hidden. Do not use the territory tab unless you have units or are the owner of a territory/zone.You can check the end of turn report and players tab.
-
@butterw @schulz @General_Zodd
yes , it is one of my primary wishes too...
even after reading all discussions on the topic whenever coming forward......and being aware after all responds that the basic game mechanics are not suitableJust remember a message from General Zodd writing:
Fog of war can be pulled off to an extent. The history however is still a an issue.
I haven't been keeping updated with a changes but as I recall, there needs to be a method of preventing a player from simply looking in history for information on enemy movements.and I myself tried (maybe pretty naive
) covering units up with a image file exactly the texture / shape of the territory , via a "miscelaneous"-map.... or "decorations-map... they seem to remain on top... but there seems to be no way of getting triggers connected to them to place or remove them... and if it would be possible there still be the terr. info.. revealing the units.....
the only way I managed is a very "poor"variant:
and only on 1st turn of game by placing a Country token on all US and Soviet Terr's s out of reach of any Axis in the 1st turn
and replace them with the units that should be positioned them
just before all allied players'turn start..
not really useful and I guess tjust to have the feeling what might have been possible with a real fog of war ;_
.. yes I still keep dreaming of it" -
@ebbe A feature request to disable via xml or properties, somewhere that its locked for remainder of game will suffice. To either completely disable history viewing or partially. A delegate with stepProperties would be sweet.
Then a hand full of possible solutions and proposals sound feasible.
I think that there is an edit delegate (unavailable to normal xml usage, probably because its too powerful for us mere humans, hehe.
-
View > Edit Map Font and Color > Font = 0, and unit counts will no longer be rendered on the map.
-
I think being totally blind to everything would be unrealistic too and it would make games pure luck dependent.
I'd want nations having an estimate information about frontline enemy units which might make risky offenses-defenses more viable plus giving better change the loser side possibly turning the tide of war.
-
@schulz
You get to know precise unit counts when you engage in battle.UnitsDrawer.java is where rendering of units takes place.
-
@butterw And the Territory Tab is a spoiler than, but that is a choice...
-
@ebbe Or maybe, you are just allowed to spy on 1 territory.
Should make games against the AI more of a challenge.A foggy stack unit count could be for ex:
- default (no count): 1 or 2 units
- V: less than 8
- X: 8 or more.
-
@butterw @ebbe @Schulz I would think that if fog of war was to come to fruition in some form then quite a few changes would be necessitated.
What are you guys envisioning as "fog of war" being? What would the parameters look like?
When I envision fog of war, within TripleA limitations , and using a comfortable size 3000x6000 map. I would lean towards each unit being able to see into neighboring enemy territory with either a chance to see all or none. Or a chance to see from 10% accuracy to 100% accuracy for all enemy presence.
Some units would be bad at this and others would be excellent. Recon units for land air and sea can see or probe deeper with great accuracy for instance.
Would make sense to have terrain effects be major factors on the fog effect. To see wider swaths, special ops would go in via ground or specialized aircraft to do surveillance. I would allow up to 4 territories deep if your nation has invested in correct equipment and training.
Battle outcomes would hinge on validity of what you can actually see with accuracy.
Something like this might play well and not just add extra steps to the game with no true benefits.
)
-
@general_zod
Drawing foggy unit counts only requires a one line hack to the code:
so it could actually be provided as a non-default display option if it is of interest. Feedback from playtest would be needed to go further.
You'd probably need to turn off tooltips on the map, and you should also be able to see full unit counts for your own units.
. -
@general_zod Simply seeing all amount of units in territories as estimation. For example,
Few 1–4
Several 5–9
Pack 10–19
Lots 20–49
Horde 50–99
Throng 100–249
Swarm 250–499
Zounds 500–999We'd see these words instead of exact numbers.
For example if a territory contains 22 infantry we'd see "Lots (20-49) of infantry"
I would like to learn if somebody is able to implement it.
-
@schulz
For unit counts drawn on the map it's an easy code modification.
you just need to write a String f(int x) method where x is the stack unit count. Names wouldn't be possible on the map, you need to either use either numbers or a symbol V, X, etc.
The text describing the meaning of a symbol could be included in the tooltip though.Something that could maybe be included is a slightly random overlapping display:
- 1 would mean 1 (75%) or 2.
- 2 would mean likely 2 (50%), but possibly 1-3.
- V would mean 3-9.
- X would be 8+
Whatever the logic defined in f, it would likely have to be hardcoded, at least initially.
-
@butterw What would be the best and easy way to represent these estimations? I know nothing about coddings beside creating maps.
Just realizes how overlapping it would be to replace "22" with "Lots (20-49) of infantry"
What about using "20-49", "20 49" or "20.49" representing these "22" units?
I think symbols might be hard to get into. I wouldn't prefer being forced to check constanty which symbol represents which amount of units.
-
@schulz
20.49 could be a good code for a range, but to display as a map unit count, anything more than 2 char is too long. In the end, it does depend how common these large stacks are. The alternative would be to display just the median value 35.Roman numerals would be my suggestion: V (5), X (10).
The next values are L(50), C(100), D(500), M(1000),
with the possibility of XV 15 and XX 20.
Alphabet letters (AB) could be used for in between values, but too many symbols just ends up being confusing. -
@butterw Would "20.49" aspect be fine if I could keep unit pattern very small like only 3 type land units? If it would be still problem then probably median number becomes the only choice.
I agree too much symbols would be confusing, I'd go with informative estimate numbers.
-
@schulz
Single character counts are ideal, 2 character counts may be acceptable, anything longer is troublesome. The more crowded the map, the worse it becomes. A longer textual description can be provided elsewhere.20-49 does seem a bit wide, you would essentially have no idea what you are up against, it may work better in a fantasy setting than ww2.
-
@butterw Ok. Alternative;
1–5----------1
6-10---------2
11-15--------3
16-20--------4
21-25--------5Then limiting stacks not having more than 25 total units.
-
@schulz @butterw I'm not quite sold on this dynamic being a good fit for fog of war. Especially if the fog of war map being a first of its kind. But its an interesting idea though. What would help is another feature request. lol
The ability to name your units/ resources with 2 names. One following stricter rules since it is the code. The second would be just a simple name for players and follows very loose rules, but really would not require the rules at all. Since they are more artistic flare than anything.
example:
Each potential German infantry brought into the game is designated Inf-0001-G up to Inf-9999-G within the xml. But the players see perhaps just German Infantry for all. They could be named indentically or completely differently since this is a artistic description only.
As I ponder the idea further. This might already be feasible. Via production frontiers or Tech Categories. And tooltips of course.
-
I suggest that those who like the "Fog of War" check out the game "Wars Across the World". It is an area movement game with fog of war rules.
It does not work very well. The problem is that unlimited stacking and the fog of war do not work together well. Putting most of your units into 1 super-stack is even more effective when your opponent can't see it.
Having a game with realistic fog of war rules, would require other changes to the game. If would require a more realistic combat & logistic system. Something like a generalized version of Columbia Games's block game system.
