Improved spotting

[Rak1445]

Hello, I have been thining about how spotting could be improved in the game.

Currently, once an enemy is spotted, the ship needs to identified in order to see the exact specs. However, a player can easily scroll the camera to the enemy's position, and visually check the ship's class, armament (many players recognize the gun's size from the turret's design by heart), or potential torpedo threat. I think this is something of an exploit, which limits the benefits of actually having to identify a ship first.

Even though the player's lookouts have only completed their identification by 11%, the player already knows his target's main specifics.

My proposition is to borrow a mechanic from the 'Wargame' series. In that game, once an enemy unit is found (but not identified), its model becomes visible to the player, but without its name, technical data and textures. Essentially, the units looks like a black blob, which is much harder to identify for the player. The textures only appear when the unit has been firmly identified by friendly forces. Here's a quick approximation how such system could work in UA:D:

This way, much about the ship is obscured and it's much harder for the player to 'cheat' in this way. Once identification reaches 100%, the ship would become fully visible as on the above picture.

I think the best option would be to keep both options possible - the player could then choose which version he prefers in Options.

Let me know what you think!

Also a disclaimer: pictures have been taken from a video by Stealth17 as I'm currently waiting for my key...

[Rak1445]

Additionally, for fog of war's sake, I think it would be interesting to have an option to hide certain information about the enemy ships (such as its detailed damage state). This would provide the players with a more realistic challenge, and force them to visually identify and guesstimate its damage from looks alone, just like in reality.

[Cptbarney]

Also spotting should be tied in with how high the ships are, since it makes more sense for a BB to spot another ship first than a DD somehow outspotting a BB. Also with info thing, if your spies manage to capture plans for said opposing ship or are able to remember key details then parts of the ship and it should get identified faster.

Also famous/infamous ships will usually get spotted quicker, but could cause morale drops or even boosts (For example if you have to allied fleets and one enemy fleet but you don't know about the allied and its actions then any famous ships arriving could be a welcome and unsuspecting surprise). You could even use that simulate friendly fire and set tension of the whole 'is it or isn't our fren?'

Weather should also affect the above as well.

For those types of ships above you could have certain sound cues play which would be pretty good along with a voice over if nessecary.

[akd]

24 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Also spotting should be tied in with how high the ships are, since it makes more sense for a BB to spot another ship first than a DD somehow outspotting a BB.

That depends on visual conditions.  If we are talking nighttime with limited visibility, the destroyer might be much more likely to spot the BB before the BB spots the destroyer.

[Skeksis]

6 hours ago, akd said:

That depends on visual conditions

It depends on Dev’s preference.

FYI, in RL destroyers are actually really big ships, if we talking daytime with no weather they're easily spotted on the horizon, 20-25kyds. In 1914 black billowing smoke was also easily spotted on/over the horizon.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Skeksis

[akd]

Sorry, but the statement that a BB should always spot a destroyer first because it is taller is wrong.

[Skeksis]

On 7/27/2020 at 8:10 AM, akd said:

Sorry, but the statement that a BB should always spot a destroyer first because it is taller is wrong.

IRL visibility is based on the ‘height of the observer’. 

Edited July 28, 2020 by Skeksis

[akd]

2 hours ago, Skeksis said:

IRL visibility is based on the ‘height of the observer’, please research, coincidence range finders, spotters etc. and why they're at the topmost position. 

It's also based on visibility conditions, which can invert the relationship, making the lower/smaller ship more likely to spot to the higher / larger ship first (think battleship silhouette against a starlit sky versus destroyer below the horizon relative to the BB and a max visibility because of conditions that is less than the maximum possible horizon based on height).

You are simply incorrect that height of observer will determine which ship is spotted first in all conditions, but in the current set of possible battle conditions allowed in Dreadnoughts, the top spotting position height should be the dominant factor.  And it should be based on height, not on "modernity" of the tower as the added tech did not really contribute to visual spotting (which was done by lookouts in 1890 and in 1930).  Arguably it would be better to simply have fixed horizon distances for classes of ships, e.g. torpedo vessels (TBs / DDs), cruisers (CL / CA) and capital ships (B, BB, BC) under conditions that allow visibility to the horizon.  But when conditions in scenarios allow for more restricted visibility (bad weather, night) target signature should play a much greater role.

To be clear, I do not like the current spotting system, even more so since it is not a true relative system.

Edited July 26, 2020 by akd

[Hangar18]

On 7/25/2020 at 1:19 PM, Rak1445 said:

My proposition is to borrow a mechanic from the 'Wargame' series.

the total war camera on realistic would also work, and might be easier to implement.

[Hangar18]

8 hours ago, Skeksis said:

IRL visibility is based on the ‘height of the observer

yeah but that means everything you can see, can see you as well. Line of sight works both ways.

[Skeksis]

51 minutes ago, Hangar18 said:

yeah but that means everything you can see, can see you as well. Line of sight works both ways.

But not so good for the ship that is out gunned. 

I've been researching this too, if just over the horizon and observers are at different heights, is the lower observer view obscured more by the curvature of the earth? haven't found an answer yet.

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Skeksis

[madham82]

7 hours ago, Skeksis said:

But not so good for the ship that is out gunned. 

I've been researching this too, if just over the horizon and observers are at different heights, is the lower observer view obscured more by the curvature of the earth? haven't found an answer yet.

 

I believe that would be true. We also need to keep in mind radar was not only able to see better in most weather conditions, but also farther than visual sightings. 

[akd]

10 hours ago, Skeksis said:

But not so good for the ship that is out gunned. 

I've been researching this too, if just over the horizon and observers are at different heights, is the lower observer view obscured more by the curvature of the earth? haven't found an answer yet.

 

If the both observers are at the highest point in their respective ships, then they (the observers) would see each other at the same distance.   But that’s not particularly useful information for most of this era.  If we are talking clear conditions with visibility out to the horizon, both likely would have seen funnel smoke already, and just seeing mast tops over the horizon does not provide enough additional information to target what you’ve spotted. Also, the topmost spotting position in a ship wasn’t necessarily the tallest point of the ship structure.

And radar, especially early radar, should not be thought of as simply extending visual distance (really unfortunate that the game treats it this way).  Visual spotting retained several advantages over radar, in particular the ability to ID your target and have a precise bearing on target.  This is particularly important when we are talking about clear conditions.

Edited July 27, 2020 by akd

[The_Real_Hawkeye]

On 7/25/2020 at 7:19 PM, Rak1445 said:

Hello, I have been thining about how spotting could be improved in the game.

Currently, once an enemy is spotted, the ship needs to identified in order to see the exact specs. However, a player can easily scroll the camera to the enemy's position, and visually check the ship's class, armament (many players recognize the gun's size from the turret's design by heart), or potential torpedo threat. I think this is something of an exploit, which limits the benefits of actually having to identify a ship first.

Even though the player's lookouts have only completed their identification by 11%, the player already knows his target's main specifics.

My proposition is to borrow a mechanic from the 'Wargame' series. In that game, once an enemy unit is found (but not identified), its model becomes visible to the player, but without its name, technical data and textures. Essentially, the units looks like a black blob, which is much harder to identify for the player. The textures only appear when the unit has been firmly identified by friendly forces. Here's a quick approximation how such system could work in UA:D:

This way, much about the ship is obscured and it's much harder for the player to 'cheat' in this way. Once identification reaches 100%, the ship would become fully visible as on the above picture.

I think the best option would be to keep both options possible - the player could then choose which version he prefers in Options.

Let me know what you think!

Also a disclaimer: pictures have been taken from a video by Stealth17 as I'm currently waiting for my key...

Hm, how about having the AI "identify" an enemy ship as, say, a CL, have the game _show_ a CL, so when you zoom in, you _see_ a CL, only for it to switch to, say, a BC once you identify it?

[madham82]

4 hours ago, akd said:

If the both observers are at the highest point in their respective ships, then they (the observers) would see each other at the same distance.   But that’s not particularly useful information for most of this era.  If we are talking clear conditions with visibility out to the horizon, both likely would have seen funnel smoke already, and just seeing mast tops over the horizon does not provide enough additional information to target what you’ve spotted. Also, the topmost spotting position in a ship wasn’t necessarily the tallest point of the ship structure.

And radar, especially early radar, should not be thought of as simply extending visual distance (really unfortunate that the game treats it this way).  Visual spotting retained several advantages over radar, in particular the ability to ID your target and have a precise bearing on target.  This is particularly important when we are talking about clear conditions.

In theory, that would not be correct due to the curvature of the earth (i.e. the highest observer sees farther). But as you pointed out in reality, the ability to discern a mast (not a sailing mast mind you) would make it a non factor especially in anything but calm seas/weather.

Also the smoke comments brings up another in game issue, on the battle map you will get smoke sightings as long as ships are present. This is done because the game doesn't have any mechanics for escape from battle. So any spotting improvements suggested need to account for that. I am still hoping this gets implemented for the campaign at least. Since breaking contact and escaping was a frequent outcome of a naval battle.

Correct about early radar, I didn't specify. So Gen 1 should simply extend visibility in adverse weather over visual. Gen 2 should provide a improvement. For example the SG unit on the Iowa's could spot a BB at 22 NM, that's farther than I have ever heard of someone making a visual sighting. Not sure why you couldn't get a precise bearing on a ship (maybe not early sets), but the later ones could give you it and far more accurate ranging and speed too.  

[Skeksis]

1 hour ago, madham82 said:

due to the curvature of the earth

Wikipedia explains it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon but there's not alot of reference material for 1914 dreadnoughts.  

Edited July 27, 2020 by Skeksis

[madham82]

19 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

Wikipedia explains it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon but there's not alot of reference material for 1914 dreadnoughts.  

Good entry here from it gives us some numbers to reference:

• For an observer standing on a hill or tower 30 metres (98 ft) above sea level, the horizon is at a distance of 19.6 kilometres (12.2 mi).
• For an observer standing on a hill or tower 100 metres (330 ft) above sea level, the horizon is at a distance of 36 kilometres (22 mi).

Looks like Yamato (probably the tallest ship I can think of) had a mast reaching 56 meters (183 ft). Like akd mentioned, no spotter would be up that high. Food for thought. 

Edited July 27, 2020 by madham82

[akd]

4 hours ago, madham82 said:

In theory, that would not be correct due to the curvature of the earth (i.e. the highest observer sees farther).

Yes, but if both observers are in the highest possible position in their ship (the observers' eyes are the respective mast heights), then they would both see each other (I mean the observers at the highest point in the ships, not the entire ships) at the same distance (this is ignoring complicating factors like refraction).  Of course spotting was not one guy standing on a masthead looking for another guy standing on a masthead at distances where you couldn't even make out a single person standing on a masthead.  But in theory, just looking at simple visibility to horizon (and to objects beyond the horizon), if observer X can see observer Y, then Y can see X.  That does not mean they have the same visibility to horizon itself, but that the lower observer can see the taller observer further beyond its visual horizon at the surface than the taller observer can see the shorter observer beyond its own (greater) visual surface horizon.

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by akd