Fire control settings

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Jeez guys - it's currently only implemented for ranged units, as stated time and again. And we will absolutely not make all units ranged....

      At the same time adding this feature to non ranged units will lead to the game breaking. Core principle : if units meet they fight.
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • Shared intelligence handles INTEL, r/w handles foreign troops in your territory, Peace is not war, Trade embargo handles the market, and war is units attack each other when they meet. "High Alert" should be between trade embargo and war, it would change the status to war when any non coalition country or country granted r/w appears within radar range of your unit(s). This would encourage communication between nation states, and keep borders more fuzzy, and could be added to the radar contact code.
      "For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" -
    • MallahanJr wrote:

      Shared intelligence handles INTEL, r/w handles foreign troops in your territory, Peace is not war, Trade embargo handles the market, and war is units attack each other when they meet. "High Alert" should be between trade embargo and war, it would change the status to war when any non coalition country or country granted r/w appears within radar range of your unit(s). This would encourage communication between nation states, and keep borders more fuzzy, and could be added to the radar contact code.
      Yep it needs to be a diplomatic feature. If you worry about your coast and lines and only want coalitions members to enter specific areas, your mindstate is allready set to war! So why not declare war on everyone? Right it is just the "what if attention". Better use the chatfeature or right of way to keep your borders clear.

      Still i like the idea having some firecontrolls.. button for fire on/off mode?
    • Sorry for write in this old tread.

      I suggest, if someone still think about this feature, when you set a path for a unity, if it cross a line of sight for other unity set to fire at all, pops the warning "This will cause a war..."
      If you set fire at all, and some unity are in this way already, you receive this pop warning.

      "When the rich wage war, it's the poor who die."Jean-Paul Sartre
    • they "magically" know and will engage (but only if it is an enemy). The main issue for naval protection still remains unchanged: a neutral fleet can simply float past you and then invade. There is no mechanic to prevent this at present (like a blockading function or such).
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • Germanico wrote:

      they "magically" know and will engage (but only if it is an enemy). The main issue for naval protection still remains unchanged: a neutral fleet can simply float past you and then invade. There is no mechanic to prevent this at present (like a blockading function or such).
      Actually... my technique to prevent this from happening is to place the ships as close as possible to the port. That way, the ships will intercept the transports before they fully disembark...

      That said, I have noticed recently that units are disembarking first before triggering war, unlike before... Not 100% certain though since I only observed that once recently.

      But I can vouch that it used to work in the recent past. It was how I got UK and USA locked up from invasions in those two games.
      "Any of you *uckin' pricks move, and I'll execute every mother*uckin' last one of ya!" - Honey Bunny
    • +1 for this feature.

      I think it would be very useful for me to have a "fire at will" setting as well as "aggressive".

      Both have their use cases indeed.

      I'm currently playing a game where I'm considering how to defend large swathes of waters whilst I'm offline.

      How realistic do we want this warfare to be? Because you can consider in the real world, if a few tanks rolled up towards your coast line past one of your littoral defense vessels, they arent just going to wave them past, maybe throw them the front door keys whilst you're at it. No. They'd radio, get permission, then blast 'em out of the water.

      I think what would be perfect, is that naval ships specifically, whilst placed on strategic water movement points, who are set to aggressive fire mode, would engage in "fighting" the enemy. Not bombarding them once in sight. Thus solving issues around units moving freely without causing wars, yet still enabling them to stop sneak attacks whilst players can't respond to the game.

      I think this is way more realistic and probably easier to implement from a technical point of view.
    • be briliant if agresive status work how work in historty (like not unit with agresive status ride almost at target or directly in target i make thread aboiut this many feature in last day with isnt work properly in selection bug and othger


      secondary disembark unit may passed from batle (and feature if i start disembark i have still unit like transport ship easy be stoped by any ship or killed by ship ...)

      but if in some time a make action to stop disembark and make clik to move again in ground magicaly directly this unit stop be ship and be ground force that say ship start do just 2 hp dmg .. unit have anti air power .. - some it is with airlifted unit like heli it take hours before capture teritoty ( infatry ..) or start fire (artilery ) but magicaly in 1 second is this unit ready cover anti air ?
    • OriginalSwift wrote:

      +1 for this feature.

      I think it would be very useful for me to have a "fire at will" setting as well as "aggressive".

      Both have their use cases indeed.

      I'm currently playing a game where I'm considering how to defend large swathes of waters whilst I'm offline.

      How realistic do we want this warfare to be? Because you can consider in the real world, if a few tanks rolled up towards your coast line past one of your littoral defense vessels, they arent just going to wave them past, maybe throw them the front door keys whilst you're at it. No. They'd radio, get permission, then blast 'em out of the water.

      I think what would be perfect, is that naval ships specifically, whilst placed on strategic water movement points, who are set to aggressive fire mode, would engage in "fighting" the enemy. Not bombarding them once in sight. Thus solving issues around units moving freely without causing wars, yet still enabling them to stop sneak attacks whilst players can't respond to the game.

      I think this is way more realistic and probably easier to implement from a technical point of view.
      Not sure, what you are talking about. Ships and Artillery fire at hostiles, if they see them as radar dots, not only if they see them physically. The combat AI can even do what the player can't: differentiating between neutral and hostile radar dots

      The sneaking past your defenses happens, while there is no war declared yet.

      Normal stance is also 'Fire at will' stance, the only difference of 'aggressive stance' is, that 'aggressive stance' can pause the movement of a unit to commence attacking.
    • be wery simply make sea provience around ground provience be owned somebody if anybody pass some like on gropund be declared war .. yes be more provience in some situation or neutral road simply just like line ( wery small and provience on pass like is gibraltzar or between france and england ( neutall sea be only "road " all other water be somebody end be much more simply and less non realistic disembark ambush