Reveling Unfair and Unrealistic intel

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Reveling Unfair and Unrealistic intel

      Greetings generals,
      I believe everyone who's frequently using airforce will agree with me on this.
      Why and how is enemy able to know from which province is my airflrce group operating?
      I understand,as soon as you enter their territory, they can (not accurately) know from which direction that airforce is coming but not exact location of my airfields.(first image showing me from what exact province my enemy is sending his aircraft from which gives me ability to destroy that airstrip relatively easily)

      IMG_20220704_174859.jpg


      What is my suggestion on how it should look like?
      Instead of showing me straight line pointing towards enemy airfield that's currently in use it should give approximate, gradually expanding, line as long as aircrafts attack range (if multiple aircrafts then shortest attack range of them all)
      (On picture number two imagine enemy's aircraft instead of my own. It is attacking ,we have knowledge on maximum attack range and direction that aircraft came from. When you take all of that into consideration we are left with what I poorly illustrated here)
      IMG_20220704_174832.jpg
      Enemys airbase could be anywhere in this red triangle.

      What will this change do to the game?
      It will require more tactical approach towards air defence and offence planing and will help justify money spendings on espionage to find where aircrafts are.
      This will especially help if you are using aircraft carriers.

      And I do know that enemy can see how many different buildings you have in province but if you use local industries and recruitment offices that can threw them away from finding your airstrips.
      This change will help develop more challenging environment for high tier players.
      Фарис Синановић, Суна

    • This is a great idea. I often thought it was odd that at first sighting, you know exactly where an airplane came from. This is especially bad for aircraft carriers. Historically, carriers relied on their mobility (on a large ocean) to prevent reprisal attacks.

      Also, it should not be possible to know what an air unit is targeting. You can know their range and direction, but not what they are going to attack. That's something only the squadron knew, not even their allies.

    • z00mz00m wrote:

      This is a great idea. I often thought it was odd that at first sighting, you know exactly where an airplane came from. This is especially bad for aircraft carriers. Historically, carriers relied on their mobility (on a large ocean) to prevent reprisal attacks.

      Also, it should not be possible to know what an air unit is targeting. You can know their range and direction, but not what they are going to attack. That's something only the squadron knew, not even their allies.
      That's exact reason why I made this thread .
      Hopefully it won't go unnoticed.
      (Pleas freezy :) )
      Фарис Синановић, Суна

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Suna232 ().

    • To build on this suggestion. I also recently noticed the “blue dots” indicating that location is the destination of an incoming group of aircraft on a patrol mission. These really give advanced notice to an enemy. Similarly when a unit is instead being targeted with a direct attack by incoming aircraft, the targeted unit has their health status blinking and the unit info indicates it is the target of bombardment even if the enemy has no visibility on the planes. Both of these give unrealistic notice of a pending attack. I’ve been able to scramble interceptors to counter these attacks because I’m fairly active. Is this a bug or is this how the interface is intended?

    • 6thDragon wrote:

      To build on this suggestion. I also recently noticed the “blue dots” indicating that location is the destination of an incoming group of aircraft on a patrol mission. These really give advanced notice to an enemy. Similarly when a unit is instead being targeted with a direct attack by incoming aircraft, the targeted unit has their health status blinking and the unit info indicates it is the target of bombardment even if the enemy has no visibility on the planes. Both of these give unrealistic notice of a pending attack. I’ve been able to scramble interceptors to counter these attacks because I’m fairly active. Is this a bug or is this how the interface is intended?
      Exactly ,and as this game is long run strategy and not arcade game,it shouldn harm those who are not always active.
      Фарис Синановић, Суна

    • freezy wrote:

      Yeah yeah I noticed it, in general I read all suggestions even if I dont reply. Its a nice idea, but it's probably not gonna be implemented anytime soon. Too low prio even if we only judge it in a vacuum vs other gameplay addition ideas.
      Much appreciated.
      Who am I to think that my suggestion have priority over other once, i just hope it will be changed,tommorow or next year, not important.
      :)
      Фарис Синановић, Суна

    • I agree that these kinds of tweaks are not a priority, because only power users will notice them. However, hiding destination indicators would also be very easy. Just hide them for everyone except the owner of the air squadron. No need to do anything else!

    • I don't find the this as being "Broken" enough to warrant any changes.

      What I do find completely insane is anyone but me being able to see the Way-Point "Orders" I give my units when I send them somewhere.

      Enemy should not be able to see where my units are going, simply they would never have access to the orders given my units unless they had spies in those units..

      They should be able to see units moving, but never any actual lines and especially any such lines after the first intersection..

      I would love to see that taken off the map.
      General Maximus Decimus Meridius - "Are you not entertained?"

      EN Moderator
      ============
      Link - Forum Rules
      Link - Chat Rules
      Link - Terms of Service

    • OneNutSquirrel wrote:

      I don't find the this as being "Broken" enough to warrant any changes.

      What I do find completely insane is anyone but me being able to see the Way-Point "Orders" I give my units when I send them somewhere.

      Enemy should not be able to see where my units are going, simply they would never have access to the orders given my units unless they had spies in those units..

      They should be able to see units moving, but never any actual lines and especially any such lines after the first intersection..

      I would love to see that taken off the map.
      Yeah, that's a bug that has been around a while. Sometimes when planes patrol over ground units, you can see their current orders beyond the next waypoint. It would be nice if that were fixed as well.

      This is really turning into a collection of either actual bugs or poorly considered interface decisions. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.

    • 6thDragon wrote:

      OneNutSquirrel wrote:

      I don't find the this as being "Broken" enough to warrant any changes.

      What I do find completely insane is anyone but me being able to see the Way-Point "Orders" I give my units when I send them somewhere.

      Enemy should not be able to see where my units are going, simply they would never have access to the orders given my units unless they had spies in those units..

      They should be able to see units moving, but never any actual lines and especially any such lines after the first intersection..

      I would love to see that taken off the map.
      Yeah, that's a bug that has been around a while. Sometimes when planes patrol over ground units, you can see their current orders beyond the next waypoint. It would be nice if that were fixed as well.
      This is really turning into a collection of either actual bugs or poorly considered interface decisions. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
      This is not a bug. It is an intended feature of espionage that army paths are revealed.

      Normally you can only see the path of units up until the next waypoint. This works correctly.

      When an army is revealed via espionage, you see the complete path of the army until its destination. But only the path it had at that moment in time (espionage snapshot). This also works correctly.

      Patroling planes also create espionage snapshots for the armies they patrol over. In that sense patroling planes work the same way as army reveal spies. Once your planes stop patroling over the army you probably notice that you can still see it inside fog of war, and that it says "intelligence from ..." in the army bar and also displays the small spy icon next to the army.

      The enemy could change the order of the army afterwards, you would still see the outdated old order from the snapshot.

    • freezy wrote:

      6thDragon wrote:

      OneNutSquirrel wrote:

      I don't find the this as being "Broken" enough to warrant any changes.

      What I do find completely insane is anyone but me being able to see the Way-Point "Orders" I give my units when I send them somewhere.

      Enemy should not be able to see where my units are going, simply they would never have access to the orders given my units unless they had spies in those units..

      They should be able to see units moving, but never any actual lines and especially any such lines after the first intersection..

      I would love to see that taken off the map.
      Yeah, that's a bug that has been around a while. Sometimes when planes patrol over ground units, you can see their current orders beyond the next waypoint. It would be nice if that were fixed as well.This is really turning into a collection of either actual bugs or poorly considered interface decisions. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
      This is not a bug. It is an intended feature of espionage that army paths are revealed.
      Normally you can only see the path of units up until the next waypoint. This works correctly.

      When an army is revealed via espionage, you see the complete path of the army until its destination. But only the path it had at that moment in time (espionage snapshot). This also works correctly.

      Patroling planes also create espionage snapshots for the armies they patrol over. In that sense patroling planes work the same way as army reveal spies. Once your planes stop patroling over the army you probably notice that you can still see it inside fog of war, and that it says "intelligence from ..." in the army bar and also displays the small spy icon next to the army.

      The enemy could change the order of the army afterwards, you would still see the outdated old order from the snapshot.
      I swear I saw you explain it as a bug to someone on a different thread late last year.

      I understand getting their full movement with espionage from a spy.

      Just so I understand this. If a ship or land unit has visibility on an enemy unit, you only get to see the next waypoint they are moving to, but a plane can see their complete orders? I just don't follow the logic here.

    • 6thDragon wrote:

      I swear I saw you explain it as a bug to someone on a different thread late last year.
      I understand getting their full movement with espionage from a spy.

      Just so I understand this. If a ship or land unit has visibility on an enemy unit, you only get to see the next waypoint they are moving to, but a plane can see their complete orders? I just don't follow the logic here.
      Quote my message that you saw or it didn't happen :P

      yes, a land or sea unit can only see the movement path up until the next waypoint. A plane that just moves by also only sees the movement path up until the next waypoint.
      What is creating the espionage snapshot is the patrol tick. Because patroling reveals armies and their orders, like spies.
      It may not be the most logical but it has always been like this. I guess in the code the whole reveal logic of patrols and spies is intertwined - the means of getting the info is different but the result is the same, as there was never a different behaviour implemented that works differently from espionage reveals.

    • freezy wrote:

      6thDragon wrote:

      I swear I saw you explain it as a bug to someone on a different thread late last year.
      I understand getting their full movement with espionage from a spy.

      Just so I understand this. If a ship or land unit has visibility on an enemy unit, you only get to see the next waypoint they are moving to, but a plane can see their complete orders? I just don't follow the logic here.
      Quote my message that you saw or it didn't happen :P
      yes, a land or sea unit can only see the movement path up until the next waypoint. A plane that just moves by also only sees the movement path up until the next waypoint.
      What is creating the espionage snapshot is the patrol tick. Because patroling reveals armies and their orders, like spies.
      It may not be the most logical but it has always been like this. I guess in the code the whole reveal logic of patrols and spies is intertwined - the means of getting the info is different but the result is the same, as there was never a different behaviour implemented that works differently from espionage reveals.
      Thanks for the detailed explanation.

      I'll write that off as me possibly misreading a thread. It sounds a little complicated and I have no interest in checking old posts from 2021 to see what was actually said.

      That explains why the order reveals only happen sometimes. I often just use planes for recon and don't always let them finish their patrol cycle to attack.

    • freezy wrote:

      Yeah yeah I noticed it, in general I read all suggestions even if I dont reply. Its a nice idea, but it's probably not gonna be implemented anytime soon. Too low prio even if we only judge it in a vacuum vs other gameplay addition ideas.
      So in all fairness to those who see things like what he wrote and you say it is a nice idea, what is the priority right now? It is one thing to say that but not sure what it is you are focused on...

    • Goose 72 wrote:

      freezy wrote:

      Yeah yeah I noticed it, in general I read all suggestions even if I dont reply. Its a nice idea, but it's probably not gonna be implemented anytime soon. Too low prio even if we only judge it in a vacuum vs other gameplay addition ideas.
      So in all fairness to those who see things like what he wrote and you say it is a nice idea, what is the priority right now? It is one thing to say that but not sure what it is you are focused on...
      There are many nice suggestions in the forum. We probably only would have time to work on 5% of those. And those 5% have to compete with other suggestions, the internal project plan, bugfixes and so on. Then there are also additional considerations, like does it contradict other planned features or the general design philosophy? Does it create additional strain on the servers or player's clients? How much players will truly benefit from it and make active use of it? Would it make the game more complicated or actually easier to use? How much could it improve the activity/retention/revenue? (and if a feature hurts any of these its usually a no-go)

      Right now we are focused on polishing the CoW2.0 client and also the new map. And we are currently also testing a new Inventory feature, which also has to be expanded and polished. And we are always also fixing bugs on the side.
      Afterwards there are also already ideas and some plans but I can't talk about them yet.

      Often times only feature suggestions which have a small implementation cost and high benefit will be squeezed in between other tasks. Stuff that is not totally necessary usually doesn't win out vs. other suggestions or planned features.

      K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Low priority = will not be done.
      Pretty much that if you wanna boil it down. Although Sometimes low prio things get done, just the likelihood of that happening is low.

    • freezy wrote:

      Pretty much that if you wanna boil it down. Although Sometimes low prio things get done, just the likelihood of that happening is low.
      Llol, that sounds like a quote from the "Hichhiker's guide to the galaxy"!
      When the enemy is driven back, we have failed. When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded. - Aleksandr Suvorov.