I think it would be great, if the ways between nodes on the sea were more visible. That would make it a little easier to defend my shoreline, because i could see more clearly which ways the enemy could go/come from.
Here an example how that could look:
What do you think of this?
Maybe make the lines a little less visible but you get the point.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
29 Replies
15 Apr 2023, 23:50
Lord Crayfish wrote:
K.Rokossovski wrote:
The land clearly shows all roads. The sea doesn't. There is no aesthetic reason to deliberately not show the sea roads.
I think there is. Aren't the land routes meant to imitate roads, which are tangible?
It is not about what they do or don't imitate; there is an artificial system in the game which doesn't allow free roaming, but restricts units to only follow "lines" (to avoid the word "roads" if you so please) and is thus crucial to their movement. It is just weird that this vital info is not shown on one type of surface.
16 Apr 2023, 02:14
K.Rokossovski wrote:
It is not about what they do or don't imitate; there is an artificial system in the game which doesn't allow free roaming, but restricts units to only follow "lines" (to avoid the word "roads" if you so please) and is thus crucial to their movement. It is just weird that this vital info is not shown on one type of surface.
But the vital info is shown on both types of surface. The nodes are visible, and routes can be inferred from them. Unlike on land the relative lack of obstacles means they tend to be more predictable. Most of the choke points are on the nodes anyway.
The absence of visible lines is simply an aesthetic difference that Bytro has decided to enact because they apparently view the map as The Big Board. With the shift towards actually displaying little trees and crags and buildings in the 2.0 terrain, I don't think that Bytro would add a feature that makes the map look less like an actual view of the battlefield.
That said it wouldn't be without merit, maybe shown if zoomed in to the maximum, or toggled along with province names.
Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value. — Marshal Foch A pretty mechanical toy [...] the war will never be won by such machines. — Lord Kitchener, on tanks
16 Apr 2023, 02:58
Lord Crayfish wrote:
But the vital info is shown on both types of surface. The nodes are visible, and routes can be inferred
When someone tells you they can't see/hear something, just take the comment at face value. You don't have to argue that it's visible (to you). I'm old, ok? It's not visible (to me). Help me out. Encourage the developers to fix the UI. One day, you will be old, too.....
16 Apr 2023, 03:02
z00mz00m wrote:
When someone tells you they can't see/hear something, just take the comment at face value. You don't have to argue that it's visible (to you).
True. All the same, it's annoying visual clutter for people who don't have a problem with the map as it currently stands.
Which is why my position on this is 'add toggleable options'.
Her Ladyship Aragosta A.K.A. "The Backstab Person" Pan-Asian is a better doctrine than Axis when played correctly and you cannot change my mind. You just lost The Game. Join the Madness here: CoW Forum Players! Unite!
16 Apr 2023, 08:05
no roads pls NO roads in the sea
知己知彼，百战不殆
16 Apr 2023, 08:22
z00mz00m wrote:
When someone tells you they can't see/hear something, just take the comment at face value. You don't have to argue that it's visible (to you). I'm old, ok? It's not visible (to me). Help me out. Encourage the developers to fix the UI. One day, you will be old, too.....
I am sorry for being disrespectful and argumentative.
I am not saying anybody in particular can see it. But at around the same size as the red dots, albeit a different colour, surely some other details in the game are harder to see? I mean that it is visible in that it can be seen, like other details, although some have difficulty.
Nothing quite like this thread's proposal, or some other similar proposals to make things easier to see, has ever been done to the visuals of the map itself, not even in the transition from 1.0 to 1.5. Many expressed dislike even for 2.0, and 1.5 before that. It is a good idea to make things easy to see, but some, myself included and likely others, would find unsightly.
Because it is difficult for some people to see these features, I think there should be a high-visibility option. I think that, rather than altering the main interface, it should be either like the low-res version which can be loaded, or be toggled along with other features.
What do you think?
Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value. — Marshal Foch A pretty mechanical toy [...] the war will never be won by such machines. — Lord Kitchener, on tanks
16 Apr 2023, 10:13
There is no discussion about the dots being visible. It is about the lines between them. As you well know, two dots close together don't always have a line between them; for example, when two dots crossing them needed to be connected. And it isn't always the shortest one that gets precedence either.
16 Apr 2023, 16:24
It is also the dots. Many times I can't see them. I don't know why, something about the zoom level or the ocean color, I don't know, but sometimes I can't see the damned things.
16 Apr 2023, 20:12
I’m gonna agree with Aragosta and Kolonos and say they should be toggled. As they said having options to dim and such. It would be a good compromise that takes care of this argument.
