Spotting behavior improved in BA2 ?

[enric]

Will be the spotting behavior improved in BA2?.

In BA1 if a unit in is spotted in a square (building, wood, etc), the square becomes spotted.
So if the spotted unit retreats to another square the new square and the unit are still spotted even if retreating to building, wood, etc, not in line of sight of the spotter (not logical).
And if another unit, no spotted yet, moves to the initial spotted square, it's spotted immediately !.

[Granfali]

+1

[AndrewGardner]

In BA2, when a unit reveals itself by firing it will continue to be visible for the rest of the turn, but it will not leave a trail of visibility on the tiles it was spotted on or moves through that will expose other units. This is the behaviour in the current EAP version.

[enric]

In BA2, when a unit reveals itself by firing it will continue to be visible for the rest of the turn, but it will not leave a trail of visibility on the tiles it was spotted on or moves through that will expose other units. This is the behaviour in the current EAP version.

This will improve the behavior.
But why do you keep the "it will continue to be visible for the rest of the turn"?.
It's very ilogical if a unit moves deep inside a forest o buildings that keeps spotted even in a tile where no LOF is posible.

See the example, rangers are spotted and move to A,B,C,D,E or F how could the spotter still know where the rangers have moved?

[pipfromslitherine]

I believe it models the fact that the spotters will be watching their movement and so see where they are moving to. It's a mechanic that keeps cover's utility without making it too powerful.

Cheers

Pip

[enric]

I believe it models the fact that the spotters will be watching their movement and so see where they are moving to. It's a mechanic that keeps cover's utility without making it too powerful.

Cheers

Pip

But, Pip, how could the spotter see their movement onto squares where is not a LOS from the spotters square? Can't understand the logical of this.

[pipfromslitherine]

You are correct if we were simulating these things precisely, but remember that each tile is abstracted.

Cheers

Pip

[Granfali]

Sorry Pip, I agree with Enric, not very logical. So if the spotter "go after" the unit to reveal all its path and final position, then other units adjacent (to the path) should be revealed too!!!
I admit this lovely game have a very good abstraction degree, but in this particular case makes no sense.

Please, consider it for BA2.

[pomakli]

I agree with Granfali, Pip and can remember, that this was an issue in forum during BA1..

"Nobody is perfect!"

[enric]

You are correct if we were simulating these things precisely, but remember that each tile is abstracted.

Cheers

Pip

I wonder, if it is abstract, it could be any way, why don't choose the more logical approach?.

[pipfromslitherine]

We'll revisit at our end, but it's not something we are currently planning to change.

Cheers

Pip

[SirGarnet]

Sorry Pip, I agree with Enric, not very logical. So if the spotter "go after" the unit to reveal all its path and final position, then other units adjacent (to the path) should be revealed too!!!
I admit this lovely game have a very good abstraction degree, but in this particular case makes no sense.

Please, consider it for BA2.

I disagree.

Once a unit is spotted/identified, it is a focus of observation that is likely to indicate whether it is moving and general direction. It must retire to disengage from combat and observation and maneuver to approach again, which in the current system can't be done all in the same turn. That is about right.