Fog of War Debate [Poll]

[Megadeth666]

There has been a lot of controversy whether chat in FOW is really fair or not.
I myself, don't think it is right that people can chat and tell others where/how many armies are on the board.
Although it seems that many think it is okay, and explain very well why it is fair.
My suggestion would be to have an option when creating a FOW to have chat, or no chat. Don't know if it has been suggested before, but I am curious to see how many like chat, or don't like it, and to see if the chat option would be good. Thank You for participating !

[wcaclimbing]

I like chat in FoW, as long as people aren't revealing where others are.
An exception to that is revealing if someone is controlling the Grand Oasis (objective), for example. I would want to hear that in the chat, even if it is fog.

The chat makes for some pretty amusing games, especially on maps such as feudal where the fights are almost always limited to two people fighting at a time. Chat is really entertaining when people start freaking out and you have no idea whats going on

[Dancing Mustard]

Do you know, I think that being able to start a game with no chat-window is a really fantastic idea.

While I think that any/all chat is fair in fog games (including position-communication and lying about the same), I do understand where people are coming from when they object to it.

Sure, their choice isn't the one I make myself. But they have every right to be able to play the game they want to play. Also, by implementing this (really really simple) fix, we'd be spared from all manner of ignore list shennanigans, people giving out poor ratings to people who don't play they way they want them to, and it'd end the perpetual tide of forum whinging about this subject (not this thread, this thread is good, I'm talking about other less well though out ones that have drifted through in the past).

Basically: an option for the game-creator to be able to have 'chat on' or 'chat off' ought not be too hard to implement and ought to solve this problem nicely. It also ought to be insanely easy to implement (requiring precious little new code). If the chat window is there, you can say what you like and nobody ought to whinge if you give their position away. If it's not there, well then it's fairly obvious you can't say anything at all.

Finally, the utility of this suggestion isn't just limited to fog-games, implementing this simple option would give a solution to people who (1) don't respond to 'GL' then get upset when people rate their attitude as mediocre and (2) people who want to start public games but are terrified of 'trash talk' occuring. Hell, it'd even make for an interesting (though unenforceable) 'silent teams' option, where you worked together in a wordless fashion, which is a vaguely interesting concept I guess.


Great idea. Good fix for irritating problem. Simple to implement.

Get it done by Christmas.

[Godd]

If there is going to be chat in a FOW game then why even have the fog on? If they want to tell everyone else who is where with how many armies then play a teams game. Chat Should be eliminated out of the FOW games except for GG, WP, GL, Hi, type of chat

[phantomzero]

The biggest problem I could see with this option would be the negotiation of alliances. Right now anyone who wishes to make an alliance must do so in the chat. If there were no chat, some people would use PM's to discuss aspects of the game, and no one would know about it.

While I don't like it when someone gives away a position in FOW games, at least it is in the chat for everyone to see.

[Dancing Mustard]

If there is going to be chat in a FOW game then why even have the fog on?

Because some people enjoy games were they are able to bargain with information, and to use deceit to outwit other players.

Come on, we've all heard this a million times before. Some people like fog to be impenetrable, some people like it to be relative, enjoying the ability to trade information and engage in diplomacy. Why have the fog on if you're going to chat? Because it adds a whole new element of interaction and negotiation to the game.

Some people like that, some people don't; we already know that. It's a personal preference thing, it's entirely subjective, and there's no right or wrong answer.

Chat Should be eliminated out of the FOW games except for GG, WP, GL, Hi, type of chat

Seriously though? You'd leave chat window but deny people the option of using it for anything other than semi-assumed acronyms? How utterly pointless would that be... you might as well just turn the thing off altogether. You suggestion has all the effect of turning off chat, but none of the merits of allowing users a personal choice. It's an altogether worse suggestion than the OP's.

The biggest problem I could see with this option would be the negotiation of alliances. Right now anyone who wishes to make an alliance must do so in the chat. If there were no chat, some people would use PM's to discuss aspects of the game, and no one would know about it.

Yeah, that's a fair criticism. But I don't think it's really that much of a problem:

1. People would know that chat-less games were alliance free zones; so if they liked games with alliances then they could just avoid chat-less matches. I guess that's the sacrifice that you'd have to make if you were totally set on not having people use information as a weapon. After all, teaming-up is info-sharing behaviour in the same way as location-revealing, so it's kind of hard to make a rule which prohibits one but not the other.

2. It would of course only be optional to turn chat off, so people could still play foggy alliance games if they wanted (but they would have to accept that info could be shared).

3. Turning chat on/off makes it no more or less likely that people would use PMs to make secret alliances. It'd be equally easy for people to do what you describe with or without a chat window, so I don't really see "people might do something they can already do" as a particularly valid criticism of the idea. Y'know, we can already use PMs to make secret alliances without anybody knowing about it, having no-chat doesn't make it any easier/harder to do it and I doubt that it would happen with any greater frequency.

[Ditocoaf]

Oops. I voted for the first one, but intended to vote for the second.

[Megadeth666]

I meant to enable you to change vote, you should be able to change it now!

[yeti_c]

Remember : Misinformation can be the downfall of an enemy...

C.

[The Neon Peon]

Isn't that the point of fog of war?

Some people talked about the Oasis map, okay... I have the oasis. only one person can tell that, and that person is nowhere near capable of breaking the 7 I have on his border. The rest of the people have stacks of 20+

Okay, so according to what half of you are saying, that person should sit there, do nothing at all against me, and lose the game for everyone. Yes, smart... very smart...

In the real world, if I am trying to hide say... a stash of stolen money (it does not really matter)... but I am stupid enough to let Fred see it. Now, since I do not have mind powers, my stupidity allows Fred to tell all of his friends about my stash of money, and maybe even post it on the internet. Yes, very smart choice of mine that was to show Fred the money. This is what happens in real life.

In the CC game, if I am trying to hide say... a large stack of troops (it does not really matter)... but I am stupid enough to let Fred see it. Now, since I do not have mind powers, my stupidity allows Fred to tell all of his friends about my stack of troops, and maybe even the players in the game. Yes, very smart choice of mine that was to show Fred the stack of troops. This is what happens in the game.

Very close resemblance if you ask me. If this was a real war, I don't think any of you would hope to have a huge nuclear build up, right on the border of your country, and expect the information to not leak out... I wonder how that happened... it is so unfair that Canada told the world that we were about to nuke them... that is so cheap... they should have let us slaughter everybody and destroy the human race.

I just don't follow the logic. If you don't want people to know about something, you hide it from everyone. You don't hide it from just your parents, you don't hide it from everyone except your next door neighbor... you hide it from everyone. If you don't want people to know about that you hold the Grand Oasis, take the desert territories right next to it, so that others can't see it.

[owenshooter]

good idea... why not take it to suggestions and fill out the form so they take it seriously?...-6cd

[sully800]

The Neon Peon builds a very large stack and exposes it to a few, but not all of the other players. The following conversation ensues...

Neon Peon: Before we go any further, all right, we have to swear to God, Allah, that nobody knows about this but us, all right? No family members, no girlfriends, nobody.
Sully: Of course.
Dancing Mustard: Agreed,
Yeti C: [from the next apartment through the wall] Don't worry, man. I won't tell anyone either.
Dancing Mustard: Who the f*ck is that?
Neon Peon: Uh, don't worry about him. He's cool.

[Windparson]

lol, this is killing me!

What not make the chat more like a FOG in real war?

Communications are garbled, misidentified, or don't come through at all?

Now that would be FOW!

[Timminz]

lol, this is killing me!

What not make the chat more like a FOG in real war?

Communications are garbled, misidentified, or don't come through at all?

Now that would be FOW!

That would be great. Have a filter that can tell when someone has typed a territory name, and have it replaced with another randomly selected name from the map. Also, have it do the same thing to numbers, and colours.

Example: I type, "Blue has a stack of 45 on Kamchatka." It gets replaced with "Magenta has a stack of 3.141529 on Peru."

[Windparson]

Would be a hoot. You might even type misleading info and the "filter" might (through the "luck" of the randomness, kinda like the dice here) make it almost correct!

[The Neon Peon]

lol, this is killing me!

What not make the chat more like a FOG in real war?

Communications are garbled, misidentified, or don't come through at all?

Now that would be FOW!

That would be great. Have a filter that can tell when someone has typed a territory name, and have it replaced with another randomly selected name from the map. Also, have it do the same thing to numbers, and colours.

Example: I type, "Blue has a stack of 45 on Kamchatka." It gets replaced with "Magenta has a stack of 3.141529 on Peru."

I could still type in, "The color of the sky has a stack of the number of months in almost the number of years a leap year occurs in, on a place with a funny name"

[Timminz]

Would be a hoot. You might even type misleading info and the "filter" might (through the "luck" of the randomness, kinda like the dice here) make it almost correct!

I've thought of a large flaw in my plan. intentionally misspelling the territory name would make thing difficult for the filter.

[Windparson]

Just make it scramble randomly. What ever is typed its scrambled. Some words get through intact some don't.

[Serbia]

Just make it scramble randomly. What ever is typed its scrambled. Some words get through intact some don't.

This would be a really cool idea!

[The Neon Peon]

Just make it scramble randomly. What ever is typed its scrambled. Some words get through intact some don't.

Why not scramble each letter randomly. That way, it will be more realistic because people will have to convert in morse code. (or secret diplomacy, the only result I see from no chat in Fog games)

[Windparson]

Its just another twist. We all know that secret communications take place ALL THE TIME! You can converse in chat and then talk out side of chat. I have had several times when people have contacted me out side of game chat and I have had to shoot them down. Back in the days of real feedback I have put it in their feedback (At least once that I can remember) that they tried to contact me outside of game chat.

Personally. in FOG games I think you ought not be able to chat, in a perfect world, you would be blocked form ANY communication. I know thats impossible, but we can all dream. That's what makes it a dream.

In the not so perfect world of CC, I think it ought to be an option to toggle chat on or off in FOG games only.

[The Neon Peon]

in a perfect world, you would be blocked form ANY communication. I know thats impossible, but we can all dream. That's what makes it a dream. In the not so perfect world of CC, I think it ought to be an option to toggle chat on or off in FOG games only.

??? In the real world, there would be loads of communication.

if I am trying to hide say... a stash of stolen money (it does not really matter)... but I am stupid enough to let Fred see it. Now, since I do not have mind powers, my stupidity allows Fred to tell all of his friends about my stash of money, and maybe even post it on the internet. Yes, very smart choice of mine that was to show Fred the money. This is what happens in real life.

if I am trying to hide say... a large stack of troops (it does not really matter)... but I am stupid enough to let Fred see it. Now, since I do not have mind powers, my stupidity allows Fred to tell all of his friends about my stack of troops, and maybe even the players in the game. Yes, very smart choice of mine that was to show Fred the stack of troops. This is what happens in the game.

Communication is always the key to success.

[Windparson]

I TOTALLY AGREE THAT COMMUNICATION IS THE KEY TO SUCCESS!!!!!!!

That is not what I am talking about. Hence the statement, which you quoted, "...in a perfect world..."

Geez, I just said, if it was possible to be able to block all communication, hence the "dream" quote that would be the "perfect" world.

A am in total agreement you can not cut off all communication.

However, I still believe in FOG you should be able to toggle off "chat"! Honorable people would abide by the idea that there is to be NO communication.

Are there honorable people on CC? YES! I play with many.

Are there dishonorable people on CC? YES! I HAVE played with many. Notice the word and usage of have. When I discover someone does not play with honor, I do my best to never play with them again.

[The Neon Peon]

What is so dishonorable about saying the truth about the game leader in fog of war so that the person does not take over the whole map?

If you find it dishonorable for someone to speak the truth and save everyone else in the game from wasting their troops on each other while you build up a stack, you may as well foe me right now and get it over with.

[Windparson]

Calm down! Good grief. Is it impossible anymore to have a conversation with someone and have different viewpoints and for both sides to get their noses out of joint?

If some one chooses, repeat, CHOOSES, a game of FOG and toggles on NO CHAT, than the HONORABLE thing to do if to honor the COMMITMENT that you just selected, or CHOSE to participate in!

It would be a risk you take if you CHOSE that type of game and game OPTIONS!

I have yet to "Foe" someone for their point of view and even more so from a conversation about a game option that does not exist and probably will not exist.

Just out of curiosity. In a single player game of FOG 3-8 players, do you inform the other players of the leaders armies and placements?