[GL] Game Log 2.0

[4myGod]

this is on the to do list already with some log 2.0

[soundman]

I think this would just clutter the log too much and there's no real need for it. Espesially in games where it's like 50 v. 40 and the 50 can't take the 40, that would be a long log of just X tried to assault Y and failed, X tried to assault Y and failed, X tried .....

[H-man]

ok, no I mean just once, 50 vs 40, failed, so it says: x tried to assualt y and failed

[slowreactor]

I think this would just clutter the log too much and there's no real need for it. Espesially in games where it's like 50 v. 40 and the 50 can't take the 40, that would be a long log of just X tried to assault Y and failed, X tried to assault Y and failed, X tried .....

You're kidding, right? Do you know how many times I have accused someone of hitting my stack and them saying they only attacked a 1? Then who ACTUALLY hit my stack? I WANNA KNOW AND GET REVENGE ON THAT GUY!!!!!

[H-man]

er..does that mean that you're in favour of the suggestion?

[slowreactor]

er..does that mean that you're in favour of the suggestion?

Very much so. I've been meaning to suggest this exact same thing, but I never got around to it.

[Dublanous1]

Well they should make it happen whether or not someone suggested it before!

[4myGod]

Game Log 2.0 will be doing this exact thing that you want. If you want to look just to make sure, here are the details:

viewtopic.php?p=19837

[sully800]

It is not possible right now because there is a lot of info that is not recorded in the game log. Namely, the starting positions of each player, partial attacks against a country, and failed attacks. Without this information, it is not possible to replay the game. However storing all that info causes a problem because it would be a ton of additional information. Several ideas/solutions have been tossed around over the years, but I think this suggestion will always be low priority.

[Halmir]

Concise description:

• Don't know if it's just me but it really bugs me that when an enemy conqurs one of my territories in a Fog Of War game, the Log only records it as: "Asshat assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from Halmir

Specifics/Details:

• It was my territory at the start of the round then I lost it fair enough. My suggestion though is that the log shows who has conquered which of my lands. I'm not too bothered to know precisely where the attack came from (it could be nice, but not vital). However on an 8 player map I could come back to find I've lost a dozen lands and I won't be certain who has taken which ones, if I can no longer see that region/continent etc

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Knowing who has taken which land helps me know where enemies are strongest - and most of all this just makes plain sense! My troops would get off a last radio message telling me that the Green army is attacking them, I'm sure!

[Woodruff]

Concise description:

• Don't know if it's just me but it really bugs me that when an enemy conqurs one of my territories in a Fog Of War game, the Log only records it as: "Asshat assaulted ? from ? and conquered it from Halmir

Specifics/Details:

• It was my territory at the start of the round then I lost it fair enough. My suggestion though is that the log shows who has conquered which of my lands. I'm not too bothered to know precisely where the attack came from (it could be nice, but not vital). However on an 8 player map I could come back to find I've lost a dozen lands and I won't be certain who has taken which ones, if I can no longer see that region/continent etc

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Knowing who has taken which land helps me know where enemies are strongest - and most of all this just makes plain sense! My troops would get off a last radio message telling me that the Green army is attacking them, I'm sure!

Amen!

[greenoaks]

this was discussed over 2 years ago.

remember, the search function is your friend.

[jefjef]

The mystery is part of FOG. You don't want mystery than play sunny games.

[Woodruff]

The mystery is part of FOG. You don't want mystery than play sunny games.

Sure, but there's "mystery"...and then there's "silly and illogical". The current implementation is "silly and illogical" because it doesn't make any sense that an army would have no idea at all who attacked them or, even more likely, what direction they were attacked from.

[greenoaks]

The mystery is part of FOG. You don't want mystery than play sunny games.

Sure, but there's "mystery"...and then there's "silly and illogical". The current implementation is "silly and illogical" because it doesn't make any sense that an army would have no idea at all who attacked them or, even more likely, what direction they were attacked from.

try to understand it with your human side