Page 1 of 1

Off-map resources visible to players

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:00 pm
by Kazander
I'm not sure if this actually qualifies as a bug or a feature request, but when FoW is enabled I should think that resources that are wholly or partially (as can happen with hex maps) off the edge of the map should not be visible to the players.

Discovered the hard way when I had a bunch of monsters in reserve at the edge of the map where I thought the players couldn't see them, that they could in fact see them very plainly. You can't cover them with FoW because they're not on the map. You can hide them, I didn't know that would be necessary at the time.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:21 pm
by heruca
If the Hide feature and the Sideboard feature aren't enough, you could always draw a big black square over the stuff you want to obscure. Of course, then you won't be able to see the monsters, either, so you might as well Sideboard them. Easy enough to do, now that you can issue commands to multi-unit selections.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:17 pm
by Omnidon
Personally, I don't care for the sideboard feature, since you can't preview the units. I think he was keeping his NPCs off the edge of the map as sort of a previewable sideboard.

As soon as we have enough flash integration, I will create a simple masking object that is opaque for the players and transparent for the GM.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:17 pm
by Kazander
That is more or less the issue, yes. I'm not crazy about sideboarding the figures as it completely removes them from play. I don't know where they go in TS, I don't know their stats (like Move). In this incident, the figures were located in the "half hexes" that are inevitably located at the side edges of a hex map. Being only half on the board, they were also half covered by FoW and (the other) half visible to the players.

The figures were in play, because I needed to know where they were moving and how quickly they could get to the players. But the players weren't supposed to know they were there yet.

I also find that I tend to avoid both the Hide and the Stealth/Invisible options, because transparency isn't always visually obvious to me. Maybe my eyes are getting too old. I've been caught a number of times with a figure I've previously hidden and the players are going "I don't see him", because I didn't toggle it off.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:48 pm
by heruca
I see your dilema regarding the half-hexes with FoW. Would it help if Hidden figures were more obvious? Perhaps if they pulsated from opaque to transparent? Because Hidden really is the ideal status for what you're trying to achieve.

Failing that, perhaps I can add a mask around the map edges, but I need to be sure the mask doesn't interfere with rollovers and unit drags by intercepting those events.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:56 am
by Omnidon
If the problem is simply that there needs to be more space on the edge of the map covered by FoW, then the grid Indent feature that was mentioned elsewhere would work better, assuming it could accept negative values.

( -61 * number of extra cells you want on the edge of the map )

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:21 am
by nortonweb
How about text (hidden of course) over the figure like the attack/target text that says Hidden?

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:27 am
by Omnidon
nortonweb wrote:How about text (hidden of course) over the figure like the attack/target text that says Hidden?
Or a big translucent H, kind of like the translucent © symbols placed over preview images sometimes.

Should be optional though.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 12:19 pm
by heruca
nortonweb wrote:How about text (hidden of course) over the figure like the attack/target text that says Hidden?
I like that idea, but it would require a slight trade-off since there is a shortage of game sprites available. Text labels (e.g., "Prone") would not appear when a unit is hidden (since I would be using the sprite normally used to display text labels in order to show the new "Hidden" label. Is that acceptable, if I make the feature optional in Preferences?

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:33 pm
by Kazander
Hmmmm. My thought was for text over the figure as well initially, but if it requires that the text labels be sacrificed, I'm not certain it's the best idea. It probably wouldn't come up conflicting too often, but I'm sure that it would come up occasionally.

Pulsing from opaque to 100% transparent would like fit the bill very well, as long as it wasn't so quick & busy that it drove your eyes crazy. It's probably more difficult to implement, but similarly pulsing from positive to negative image would work too. Not sure how much extra work that is for the program though, and due to TS updates it can drag quite a bit as it is.

What do others think though?

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:47 pm
by nortonweb
Yeah I meant over the top of the figure rather than as a label. That way you know its hidden with a quick glance. An H instead of text would work fine I'd think.

Like the blackout mode text but for figures. Of course only the figure owner should see the text :D

Oh I never said I almost always have to check to see if the figure is set to hide by using either the Unit Manager screen or the figures menu. I can't tell the difference between the two states just by looking at the figure. So I'd love this change/feature.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:50 pm
by heruca
Would it help if hidden units were shown at, say, 25% opacity rather than 50% opacity? That should make for a very clear distinction between hidden and non-hidden units.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:31 pm
by Kazander
It may; hard for me to say without seeing the result and trying it out.

Maybe a configurable option with a slider bar or something?

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:42 am
by heruca
After looking at the code, it seems I was using an opacity of 65% (not 50%) for hidden units. I've changed that to 50% for v1.4f.

Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:45 pm
by nightwalker450
I'll consider this fixed with the changing to 50% opacity.