I agree with SandMan on many points. The terrain should definately be visible at all times (or some of it, I will get there later). Line of Sight should be used to determine whether units or buildings can be seen. If a building is seen, show it on the map always. If units are seen, they are visible, until they move out of the units LOS, or the player''s unit moves away.

Stealth must also be improved. Various units should be able to move stealthily, at a movement speed cost. Of course, this has its limits, but it would allow scouts, for instance, to get very close to the enemy without being seen, to get information about troops, etc.

Now, As I said before, not ALL of the map should be visible, only the amounts that the player would normally know about (we are talking terrain here, not troop and building positions). In my case, this is a nation, or continent (the total area is something like the size of the Earth...). This visible area is then expanded through scouts, troop movements, etc.

Z.

The player should at least know where the main body of the enemy force is situated. He may not know the exact deployment or correlation of enemy forces but he should at least know their approximate location. Maybe there could be a grayed out icon of a generic enemy unit. I dont'' know I''m just tossing out ideas.

quote: Original post by ewiar
The player should at least know where the main body of the enemy force is situated. He may not know the exact deployment or correlation of enemy forces but he should at least know their approximate location. Maybe there could be a grayed out icon of a generic enemy unit. I dont' know I'm just tossing out ideas.

If you know the position of the enemies buildings, it is a logical assumption that the main body of his force will be there. This is especially true if you have some sort of maintenence system which means units can only spend a certain amount of time away from their camps. (I am in the process of working something out for this)

I like the idea of unit visibility based on density and unit type. I have something similiar in mind myself, where each unit has a stealth value (possibly modified by terrain) and this determines how easily spotted it is. Coupled with true line of sight this means that a huge tank rush force should be spotted a thousand miles a way, while a small infantry force could sneak right into your base before you even know it.

quote:
Original post by Zaei
Now, As I said before, not ALL of the map should be visible, only the amounts that the player would normally know about (we are talking terrain here, not troop and building positions). In my case, this is a nation, or continent (the total area is something like the size of the Earth...). This visible area is then expanded through scouts, troop movements, etc.

I think that depends on your setting. In a low tech/medieval/fantasy type setting, then I would agree. In a modern/high tech/sci fi setting I think it is perfectly reasonable that you should have see the whole of the terrain.

An interesting idea if using a 3D engine with dynamic LOD reduction would be to take map knowledge into account when determining the level of detail of a particular part of the map. In an area you havent explored, the detail is always low, maybe with some random errors thrown in just for good measure. Only when you explore it properly does the finest level of detail appear.


Edited by - Sandman on November 27, 2001 6:13:04 AM

The Medieval setting is my target, with a bit of fun thrown in for good measure =).

I agree that the entire are should be visible if in a high tech setting, unless it is a space RTS (has this ever been done?). In that case, there would be unexplored areas for the player to discover, etc.

I like the LOD idea, and might just have to use it, as opposed to a fog of war (Now that I think about it, 3D fog of war could simply use regular fog.... with the near and far fog values something like 0.1 away from each other...). Maybe I will use both, or a greyish fog... blah blah blah =).

Z.

Well in a medieval setting you should have a vague idea of the terrain and you should definitely be able to spot large groups of units from far away.

Well in a medieval setting you should have a vague idea of the terrain and you should definitely be able to spot large groups of units from far away.

One idea i have been playing around with is what I
call: "Information Accuracy".

As an enemy unit is observed by one of your units it
is given a high IA (Information Accuracy) value. As your
unit no longer has it in line of sight, the IA value will
drop over time until it reaches zero and the unit marker
is removed from the map.

This would give the player a reason for scouting and keeping
information up to date.

This same feature I planned to use for "surveilance" information
i.e. spy sattelite photos. A analysis of the photo is made with
IA values. E.g. a photo of an enemy city with some identified
buildings, building A is with 100% certainty a munitions factory,
vehicle B is with 40% certainty an military transport.

This makes information gathering a vital part of the players
strategy.

/trysil

"A witty and slightly sarcastic quote from an unkown source"
-- The generic SIG

/trysil

Edited by - trysil on November 29, 2001 4:02:54 AM

Has anyone here played Red Alert II?
There are tons of great things about that game, in the area of FOW alone...
FOW: The levels begin with the classic FOW. When you move units over a certain area, that FOW is permanantly deleted, based on viewing radius for that type of unit. In multiplayer mode there''s crates that have several effects, including revealing all, or making you "forget" the entire map. However, you must have a (radar building/air command) set up, to view the map. It''s quite realistic, then... as the air command can create 4 jets, and these can be used as scouts (fly from one end of the map in a few seconds, and have a viewing radius of a screenwidth)
SPIES: For those that liked the spies idea: RAII has them- and acting much like you proposed. No assasinations, though. If they walk into a power plant, the enemy''s power grid is shut down for a time. If they walk into a refinery, half the $$$ is stolen. I forget the other effects. Instead of targeting to attack, they target to disguise- they take on the form of whatever infantry form you choose. (Even cows or polar bears, as RAII has wandering "wildlife") If they''re properly disguised as the enemy, they obey the player who created them and are recognized only by smart enemies (ai or otherwise), and to guard dogs, who instantly leap for the jugular when in range.
SATTELITE: RAII also has the "total picture" option, too- in that the allies can build a Satellite Uplink (name?) that will instantly reveal the map in its entirety, both in the map window and playing view. The soviets can create towers that keep everything at a radius blacked out on the opponents map- if you want to see what''s there, then go there.
UNIT INVISIBILITY: Some units aren''t even visible if your next to them- Allies have special tanks that camoflage themselves as trees. The base infantry type (G.I''s or Conscripts) can also barrack any building on the map, taking potshots at enemies from the windows at will.

I wouldn''t be so quick to shout down FOW and it''s decendants: Westwood studios has been extremely successful in working gameplay possibilites using the idea.
-Tok

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Feel free to email me HERE
*Howdy Kids, Do /YOU/ know what time it is? It''s tangent time* -Baldor the Bold

You could have satellite buildings and satellite jamming buildings that the player can build. When the player builds a
satellite building he gets to pick a spot on the map he wants to be revealed and it puts a circle on the map where he can
see all that is going on in the area he chose. No matter how many satellite buildings you have, you can only have one
area that can be revealed. Extra satellite buildings will be used to support the first satellite building if the other
player builds satellite jamming buildings.

A defense against this is to build a satellite jamming building. Which (as you may have guessed) messes up the satellite
viewing of another player. The object is to have more satellite jamming buildings than the other player if you want to
mess up the other player''s satellite buildings. And he wants to have more satellite buildings than you have satellite
jamming ones. Here is a list of examples of things that can happen:

1 satellite building against 3-4 satellite jammers = The player with the satellite building gets bogus information about
what area he''s looking at. One way to do this is to start showing the player using the satellite things that happened like
8 minutes ago.

1 satellite building against 5+ satellite jammers = The satellite building viewing area goes away and the player can no
longer see what is happened in your base.

You don''t want to build too many more than the player, or then you''ll alert him to build more satellite buildings. You
also don''t want to bunch together all your satellite jammers, or the other player will see them all through the satellite
viewing circle and know how many satellite buildings he needs to build. How many satellite buildings/jammers the enemy has
would be great with spies like someone else suggested earlier. Or you can send in a spy to sabotage the enemy satelite
buildings/jammers.

quote: Original post by AdmiralBinary
I think this is a really good idea, and I have a suggestion as to how it could be implemented in a tiled-map game (like C&C or AoE):

Each unit has a "visibility value", the higher the value, the easier it is to spot. Now, each tile in the game also has a visibility value, and that value is increased with each unit that is near it. (of course it goes back to normal once those units leave.) The higher the visibility value of a TILE the easier it is to spot that tile via satellite/ground recon. For instance:

This is an 8x8 square of tiles. The numbers indicate how visible that tile is.

In this square, there is a unit in the middle with a visibility value of 4.

12222211
12333211
12343211
12333211
12222211
11111111
11111111
11111111


You get the picture. Now for TWO units in a square, right next to each other, each with a visiblity value of 4.


15555551
15666651
15677651
15666651
15555551
11111111
11111111
11111111

I don't know if I've made this very clear, but if implemented properly, I believe this would make using little groups of commandoes etc. very effective, because they have low visibility values AND there are only a few of them. RadGuy had the idea, I'm just suggesting a practical way to use it.

---------------

I finally got it all together...
...and then forgot where I put it.

Excellent idea admiral. You made yourself very clear and it would make it realistic. Like if one person was standing on a ridge with trees behind him, he would be hard to see. But if there were 10 people on the same ridge, they would be a lot easier to see.

There are a lot of good ideas going around to fix some of the problems with FOW. On idea I have is that scouts should be harder for the enemy to see and have a very smart AI. So you start the game with 4 scouts at your disposal and can build more later. You then send them in a direction to scout, therby removing the fog. But since they are a scout, they can only be seen if an enemy is within 1 or 2 tiles of them and if they are not moving, they cannot be seen unless you walk right next to them. This way, they would stop moving in the vicinity of the enemy, or back track if they had to. Then you could quickly discover the terrain with realistic scouts. Then the terrain and buildings are always on the map and anywhere you have a scout, units are also reported. Also, you could plant a scout on top of a hill to see the activity in the enemy base. To balance this, scouts can spot enemy scouts at a greater distance, of say 10-15 tiles and 5 if they are stationary. This way you could patrol your camp to spot enemy scouts.

---
Make it work.
Make it right.
Make it fast.

Edited by - CaptainJester on December 5, 2001 11:47:41 AM