LOS a Problem Maybe ?

[Gordons HQ]

No Ed you just out type everybody and people give up because the threads just deteriorate into your view forced upon us.
Propaganda works that way, say it often enough and people will believe you.

It's quiet simple really the LOS issue.
In the Game you can do what no human can do on the battlefield.
You can see the LOS from any hex you left click on, even kilometers away, behind hills, everywhere in fact.
This gives the player a God like quality that no commander ever had.
IMHO it often leads to a type of play in PBEM games that generally becomes like a childrens game of hide and seek.
WWII was never fought like this no matter how many times people will try to justify this issue.
You quote some games, well try Steel Panthers a long well established game, you can't click anywhere there and see a LOS. That is much more realistic in this respect.

ED all I have done here is to put this LOS issue up for discussion, but you can't resist hijacking the thread because you don't like the issues I raise.
This is what I take exception to, just as others have in the past in these very threads.
Well it's for reasons like this in the past I have stopped playing this game. It's just not worth attempting to discuss anything here that you don't like,
because you will out shout us, or I should say out type us and never give us a chance to discuss anything.

All I said was I knew your response in advance and I wasn't wrong, you were against change of this sort and I noted that, as everyone else reading the thread would do so.
But you couldn't stop there could you, you have to continue to bore everyone by repeating it again, so people get fed up of reading these threads and in the end there is no discussion on this point, just again your forced views upon us.
This thread is now useless as a discussion on this point, thanks
OK I've said more than enough
Cheers Gordon

[Hawk Kriegsman]

OK Ed I knew I would get this response from you.
It seems you are against any change and your views have been noted.
Can anyone else please who has other views please comment.

IMHO it is fine the way it is. As Jonathan stated it the price you pay for IGOUGO.

It is not unrealistic at all to click on a hex to see what you can see from that hex.

All manner of items that are not reflected in the game such as: (recon photos, topo maps, familiarity with the area in question, previous recon in the area, previous action in the area, local soldiers fighting in an area the grew up near, etc....) that would allow one to have a good idea of what can be seen from where.

Thanx!

Hawk

[Hawk Kriegsman]

No Ed you just out type everybody and people give up because the threads just deteriorate into your view forced upon us.
Propaganda works that way, say it often enough and people will believe you.

I believe this is what is known as a personal attack.

It's quiet simple really the LOS issue.
In the Game you can do what no human can do on the battlefield.
You can see the LOS from any hex you left click on, even kilometers away, behind hills, everywhere in fact.
This gives the player a God like quality that no commander ever had.
IMHO it often leads to a type of play in PBEM games that generally becomes like a childrens game of hide and seek.
WWII was never fought like this no matter how many times people will try to justify this issue.

and there are scores of things that take place in the CS game that didn't take place in comat also.

Such as: you can move an undisrupted unit one hex in any direction it goes there 100% of the time no questions asked

You can move a BT-7 tank full speed across country and never have to worry about it throwing a track

You can move any vehicle no matter how heavy down a dirt road in wet conditions and never get bogged down

Do you need more?

The game is an abstract simulation of tactical WW2 combat; nothing more; it is a game.

You quote some games, well try Steel Panthers a long well established game, you can't click anywhere there and see a LOS. That is much more realistic in this respect.

Then go play Steel panthers

ED all I have done here is to put this LOS issue up for discussion, but you can't resist hijacking the thread because you don't like the issues I raise.This is what I take exception to, just as others have in the past in these very threads.

You asked for opinions and he gave one. I am sorry but IMHO you have hijacked your own thread with an anti-Ed rant.

Well it's for reasons like this in the past I have stopped playing this game.

Based on what I see of your posts this may be your best course of action.

It's just not worth attempting to discuss anything here that you don't like,because you will out shout us, or I should say out type us and never give us a chance to discuss anything.

It is clear to me you don't want discussion. What you want is your way.

All I said was I knew your response in advance and I wasn't wrong, you were against change of this sort and I noted that, as everyone else reading the thread would do so.

If you knew this why even mention it.

But you couldn't stop there could you, you have to continue to bore everyone by repeating it again, so people get fed up of reading these threads and in the end there is no discussion on this point, just again your forced views upon us.

Just as you are boring everyone with your whining. :hissy:

This thread is now useless as a discussion on this point, thanks

No thank you.

OK I've said more than enough

You get no argument from me.

Thanx!

Hawk

[Jason Petho]

Isn't orienteering part of military training?

Even with a basic, civilian orienteering course, one can determine generalized LOS from any position on a topographic map, whether you are there or not, usually with a cursory glance at the map.

I believe it would be fair to imagine that an officer, from any army, would have a good understanding of map reading and interpretation, especially from something as informative as a topographic map. (considering this is prior to the days of GPS).

Jason Petho

[umbro]

Oh the joys of orienteering! Chinagraph pencils, transparent overlays, biting wind, driving rain. Reminds me of why I moved to Hawai'i.

I'm not even worth my salt and I can still decide LOS by rule of thumb from a topo map.

umbro

[Huib Versloot]

I would find it very interesting to play if we could not determine LOS by clicking on the map, but could only determine precisely by sending a unit there. It would require some map study beforehand to find out the probable "key positions".
It always amazed me how the commander of the 80th US ID (or it could be one of the regimental commanders, I forgot) could read immediately from the topo map which where the key LOS positions south of the Sure river during the battle of the Bulge. when I visited that area, it was really not easy to see (me being without military training) why "this" hill had priority over "that" hill. Once I visited that actual hill you could see how right this commander had been.
At the same time it also amazed me how some of the higher US officers (Corps and up) neglected proper map reading, not recognizing the obvious value of the Roer river and the dams etc.

However coming back to CS, maybe we should not change it. CS has a hex system and some hexes you would logically expect to have LOS over others do not have it. I remember a peculiar LOS situations in the RS Leeuwilang river scenarios. One would have to step in several hexes to find out which one actually has the required LOS over certain parts of the river. Something that would not be necessary in real life.
The game Conquest of the Aegean has an excellent LOS system because you actually play on topographical maps. The LOS system of CM is not too bad either, but this game too is not based on a hex map.

just my 2 c.

Huib

[Huib Versloot]

Isn't orienteering part of military training?

Even with a basic, civilian orienteering course, one can determine generalized LOS from any position on a topographic map, whether you are there or not, usually with a cursory glance at the map.

In Holland, yes probably. It's flat as a pancake, however that brings it's own challenges to find features that are a few meters higher than the rest, especially if they're not man made.

In the rugged parts of the Ardennes? No way! I'm quite familiar with map reading, but I simply couldn't do it like some military commanders could, not even while I was there, let alone from a map only. It would turn out to be guess work among the high hills (see my other post)

I believe it would be fair to imagine that an officer, from any army, would have a good understanding of map reading and interpretation, especially from something as informative as a topographic map. (considering this is prior to the days of GPS).

As long as they are not Army level from the 1st US Army ...LOL

/H

[Jason Petho]

Of course, like all things, some are better skilled at it than others.

Jason Petho

[K K Rossokolski]

I believe it would be fair to imagine that an officer, from any army, would have a good understanding of map reading and interpretation, especially from something as informative as a topographic map. (considering this is prior to the days of GPS).

Jason Petho

A perilous assumption. An old Army aphorism..."The most dangerous thing on the battlefield is a Second Lieutenant with a map and compass!!" Like most of these old sayings, based on in the wisdom of soldiers gained by hard experience.

[Jason Petho]

A perilous assumption. An old Army aphorism..."The most dangerous thing on the battlefield is a Second Lieutenant with a map and compass!!" Like most of these old sayings, based on in the wisdom of soldiers gained by hard experience.

Fair enough and duly noted.

Hence the "skilled" post above.

Jason Petho