Fog of war?

[akiceabear]

I'm not a fan of the tone from either side, although in principle I support the pro-FOW camp. What I find interesting is there is now a majority that appear to support the idea OR tolerate it, contrary to in the past. It also highlights that just because one can write long posts doesn't mean they represent the community.

So far the lack of support and worried comments about "not wanting to patrol and such" that came in every thread is saying that many won't tolerate any form of FoW.
I can and did write my own "FoW-like" ideas, but because there's some dreamers who will claim everybody support their own "better because global" fantasy we need some lengthy criticism to point all aspect.

I was referring specifically to the embedded poll, which shows a relative majority support a FOW implementation. Just because a handful of posters are extremely vocal (on either side) doesn't mean the majority of players agree with them.

Edit: Also, I stand by my statement a few pages ago that the divide between the two camps is unbridgeable. I'm fairly certain there is absolutely nothing that could be said to convince you that FOW fits well, nor vice versa. Anti-FOW hate the idea exactly for the reason pro-FOW like it. It changes the scope of stories that the game can generate, with is a pro or con depending on what kind of stories you like to experience/control.

[Johnny Masters]

Yeah, i was about to write a lenghty (don't worry it would be a polite one) answer, point by point, but really it all boils down to:

Anti-FOW hate the idea exactly for the reason pro-FOW like it

A lot, if not all, of the anti-fow argument is a feature for pro-fow, so it's really a moot point. Might as well just focus all this undirected energy to provide positive arguments for their own side *hints*hints*
-
Only argument I don't really get is what are all those stories that would be missed with FoW? The only one that is repeated ALL the time is watching raiders interacting with the map, which boils down to attacking fauna or other factions. This is maybe 1 or 2 stories, not several. It gets old, at least for me, and FoW doesn't prevent, just delay these sort of story or requires exploring.

What else is there in terms of story making that only omniscience gives? (that's a real question, not rhetorics)


P.S.: At this point in rw's development, i think it's far more beneficial to discuss "how" would FoW be implemented and not "should it?"

Edit: actually, its a benefit for the community more than RW dev. stage. Its hard discussing the should if we cant discuss the how without it turning into flames

[Kegereneku]

I was referring specifically to the embedded poll, which shows a relative majority support a FOW implementation. Just because a handful of posters are extremely vocal (on either side) doesn't mean the majority of players agree with them.

I understand, but making a Poll that give meaningful answer is harder than it look.
In our case for example FoW have been presented as a Binary choice and the poll do not address the how important we would accept FoW to be.
So I'm betting many player here voted in term of "interest" to compensate for the lack of alternative implementation. There's also a predictable offset in that open minded player will rarely say no to the potential of getting more (they all hope that Tynan will ultimately make the idea fit right)
And finally there's how Poll can be biased.

I'm fairly certain there is absolutely nothing that could be said to convince you that FOW fits well, nor vice versa.

This is not true.

If we go by the classic definition of FoW in wargame as a global persistent fog, no, IMHO it simply don't fit Rimworld.
A "Fog of War" is a game mechanic is usually meant to force you to fight it to maintain a statue quo in fast paced game where loosing sight make you vulnerable to an intelligent/constantly looming enemy. It is also used to encourage exploration...for resources and empire expansion.
Rimworld is slow paced, event are rare burst of activity you don't want to miss any moment, enemy are custom-made challenge that a fog would only make frustrating, and as exploration go, since your base/territory won't grow indefinitely suggestions to explore outside your colony yield more potential to improve the game.

On the other hand, If we go toward more reasonable and very very localized "veil of uncertainty" that are goal-driven around the cores element of Rimworld like storytelling...
Then I gave idea for a "Stealthy Assassin event" that can also be adapted as a "Predator event" (so localized you can afford a true line of sight detection)
I gave a way to go check drop zone without the needless inconvenient and hassle of a full persistent/reappearing fog.
Following the same logic you could have to "confirm" the identity of any "raid force" once.

I consider those ideas fit the game with as little modification as possible, none of it require specialized scout/patrol, none force repetitive hassle upon the player, and they make sure to not blindly impede storytelling potential.
And YET, those ideas are susceptible to not interest players who don't want to have to dispatch a colonist to check any damn cargo drop and prefer omniscience and they would be entitled to their opinions.

What else is there in terms of story making that only omniscience gives? (that's a real question, not rhetorics)

Okay a special : storytelling/ambiance-related things that will be impeded by obtrusive FoW.

For starter when making Events (which pretty much make the game) a FoW would make pointless to even think at making event that don't happen where your colonist are.
Ex : if you had planned to have two factions fight on your territory for example it would require a "scout" to reach the place in time to see it, and waste more time if you want to intervene.
The problem stay even if you are notified and given hint on the place it happen (notice which defeat 80% of the reason to have a fog in the first place).

Obviously there's the "Once per game" scene that you would love to see and remember for discussion on the forum. aside I just realized it must be useful for debugging

Globally, it concern everything you can take interest in (including for fun/storytelling) but are not notified of. (and since even a 'patrol AI' can't make relevant report, needing a patrol would only make it harder)
- If you have entity/groups wandering by the colony for various reason, and you want to interact with them it will take time to see what happen, gather your pawn and intercept (to say : invite to drink a beer), so best avoid a scouting hassle that fundamentally only make you waste time.
- Any information on enemy, ally, animal. We don't want to consider them just as "meat" right ?
- Knowing what an AI is attacking first, so you can guess if they actually got around your defense of it it's luck.
- Visitor/ally/enemy loosing items while passing/fleeing away from your colonist.
- Visitor/ally/enemy getting lost in fog (who said you had to be the one blind here ?)
- avoiding potentially important items meant for storytelling getting damaged/stolen because you can't afford making a important colonist into a mindless patrol drone just to know it was here.
- if a stampede of Buffalo pass, why hide the spectacle ?
- There's a Migrating herd and you don't want to need scout/patrol/lucky blind hunter to know.
- Animals starting to eats food from recent drop pod or simply doing animal-stuff (could be relaxing to watch while your colonist work their ass off)
- If a psychic probes is making all animal fight each other, you'll want a global view.
- If a psychic probes (what if yours ?) is making raider/visitor insane, you'll want to see it even if they are away.
- If there's heavy terrain/climate change (agreed FoW proponent usually agree to see the terrain)
- If there's a predator lurking around and you don't want it to depend on a "must kill" Events you can prefer to be able to check on him without requiring a constant scout/patrol
- Poisonous gas around geyser (seen indirectly on animal getting sick)
- Invasive flora, like carnivorous flora (Feed me !!!!) or just plants growing around your installation.
- Invasive fauna, (not notified because they are natural/not too dangerous) like say beaver cutting tree.
- possible abandoned trap (seen only by the player, not the colonist)
- Visitor looking at a statue you put far away from the base for reasons.
- Raider getting killed trying to steal a trapped statue you put far away from base.

Last with an important aspect : combat tactic
This is not just "combat stuff", the tactic you try/use have a relevance in how you want to write your story. If you aren't given the information and time you need to attempt plan like "attack at night" you won't even try.
Right now the AI is dumb & focused on mindless destruction, but if it was smarter and less predictable, omniscience could be not a luxury, nor a cheat, but a required balance.

[zormad]

Do you guys know when FoW was introduced and when was it removed? I mean: in which versions was it included? I'd like to try it.

[Kegereneku]

You can try to find the version from the time Tynan posted this message and the changelog.

Myself I arrived after FoW was already removed.

[Darth Fool]

I do find it interesting that one of the arguments that the anti-fog advocates make is that there will be stories that are missed if you aren't omniscient.   I, for one, find that most of the stories they describe are already missed unless I have a colonist near by.  Perhaps this is just because I play on large maps, and if you play on small maps it doesn't matter.  It is far more likely that I will find dead bodies from a conflict between external factions near the edge of the map than I will watch it, unless one of my colonists happen to be in the area.   In fact, in a recent play through there was a small mechanoid contingent of one centipede and one scyther guarding a small group of cryo-pods that I purposefully left alone hoping that someone else would take care of it.  Despite being interested in such a conflict, I only noticed that one had happened after the fact because of the dead bodies lying around.

I suspect that much of the FoW disagreement comes about because of different play styles, and that, as others have said, this is really an argument that will not be resolved through discussion and convincing the other side through rational conversation.  A working version of FoW that can be balanced is likely the only means of convincing people, either because it works or it doesn't.  I suspect that such a thing will only become available via a mod, at least until such time as a mod that add FoW is so successful that The Power That Is decides to incorporate it into core.

[akiceabear]

Via the change log:

Manhunter animals will not attack doors. They’ll hang around just outside the door. This is trained in a tutor note.

(speculation) This makes me suspect Tynan may revisit the FOW mechanic in a coming alpha.(/speculation) Alternatively, this scenario is pointless. In my view the above scenario provides a great story, although most of the umph is lost via the eye of god approach. Imagine instead that your pawns wake up, open the door and are startled (perhaps into a real panic/mood) when they see the wolves outside - and you as the player are just as anxious before opening the door! The player being able to anticipate that because they observed the animals outside for 4 hours already (while pawns slept) makes a huge difference in impact.

[Kegereneku]

To me that's simply Tynan making raptor animal incapable of opening door as it should be.

I don't see any 'umph' in your story, a random chance to get a colonist mauled to death as he pass a door isn't interesting. You aren't in an Action-Horror FPS reacting in the instant, at best you'll get the notification "Colonist need medical attention", pause the game and check who got unlucky.

And I say that as the one who suggested a "stealthy assassin/predator" event (with a special rule) earlier in the thread.

The WONDERFUL Eye of the storyteller is what give all the tension to this event.
To quote the king of suspense, Alfred Hitchcock :
“There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two."

In our case, seeing there is wolf around and wondering when, if they do, one will attack your colonist, is the tension. You'll be continually torn between keeping all your colonist safe or letting them work, never knowing if suddenly the pack of wolf will change course.

And what if a colonist was outside when a Wolf pack event start ? If you are blind, you'll simply ask him to get back ASAP in straight line hoping he don't meet one. With the great Eye of the storyteller you can SEE if the wolf pack will intercept him and have him stop, run away in a non-ideal direction until you can prepare a rescue party. (which if the survival was based on blind-luck, would be pointless)

At all time the player will be interacting and not suffering from bad game-design.

Even my "Human Assassin" event work best when it is the only time where the enemy is invisible.

[Negocromn]

For me, the main thing is that FoW would require A LOT of developer time to work properly, so much that it would only make sense to invest this much time in it if Tynan were to be convinced that FoW needs to be implemented as a core feature of RW.

I don't see it happening, so I think modding is probably your best shot at ever having FoW.

[TLHeart]

Via the change log:

Manhunter animals will not attack doors. They�ll hang around just outside the door. This is trained in a tutor note.

(speculation) This makes me suspect Tynan may revisit the FOW mechanic in a coming alpha.(/speculation) Alternatively, this scenario is pointless. In my view the above scenario provides a great story, although most of the umph is lost via the eye of god approach. Imagine instead that your pawns wake up, open the door and are startled (perhaps into a real panic/mood) when they see the wolves outside - and you as the player are just as anxious before opening the door! The player being able to anticipate that because they observed the animals outside for 4 hours already (while pawns slept) makes a huge difference in impact.

as much as you think fow is needed, this does not portend anything about fow. It just means that the animals will not stand there and attack the door while ignoring the colonist in the hallway shooting at it. the animal will attack the colonist only now. much better.

[Frankenbeasley]

I know I'm a newcomer, and I apologise for butting in to this, but I really don't understand the argument that's going on. I would assume that any FoW mechanic would be something that one would be able to activate at the point of choosing a story teller, not that it would be a mandatory condition for all game starts. If so, there is no reason to take a dogmatic stance against it.

Personally, I love RW for the base-building more than the combat, so I would be very unlikely to choose to use FoW in my games, but I see no reason for it not to be included. Or, if it is an option, I'd quite like to see it as off by default on Phoebe and Cassandra and on by default on Randy, since that seems to suit.

I suppose, the real divisions are two-fold. Firstly, you have the base-builders, for whom combat is one of the necessary obstacles to their creations, versus the strategists, who see the creation of their base as one of the necessary tools in their conflict - both seem to have reflexive stances on the principle of FoW, almost as if it is a moral decision that must be resolved. Secondly, you have those who really feel the need for an ending or a target and those who are more than happy simply to potter along, until they get bored or have a brainwave, and don't care whether there is a sense of completion or not.

I'm sure, eventually, some form of FoW will be introduced, and I will welcome that additional feature as I welcome all the others. However, I don't believe that, at it's current stage of development, RW needs FoW more than it needs other aspects of the game tweaking. I'm sure that many of those who are eager for FoW will agree that their gaming experience will be improved to a greater extent through things like improved AI and better use of melee rather than simply flinging a blanket over the fighting as it exists now.

When it all comes down to it, there are fundamentally different ways to approach RW, either as a combat game or a sandbox builder. I suspect that most players fall into the mess in the middle and love the game all the more for it. For me, it's to the credit of Tynan and everybody else who is helping realise this game, that RW can appeal to both camps and that it can provoke such impassioned debate.

Sorry, I'm a sententious git at times.

[Kegereneku]

Frankenbeasley, your opinion is justified and understandable if you think FoW is a feature that is "easy" to code. In fact, Tynan had some form of Fog of War early Alpha that was removed since then (or more precisely only limited to previously unseen indoor and map-area-hidden-by-mountain).

No one will berate you for thinking that. We are precisely here to debate the opinion of each other..
For example : Opposite to you and as stated in details since here, I consider any form of "classic Fog of War" to be something much more complicated and intricate than any mere "On/off feature" and even fundamentally incompatible with Rimworld.

So it stand to reason that I would not encourage adding a feature that would harm the game (including by making it into something utterly different)

[Johnny Masters]

Woah, sorry not answering before, i had totally forgotten this topic.

Have in mind that my answers below are not meant to antagonize or put you in the wrong, it just reinforces what akicebear said regarding what anti-fow people consider a bad thing being a feature for pro-fow people.

Okay a special : storytelling/ambiance-related things that will be impeded by obtrusive FoW.

For starter when making Events (which pretty much make the game) a FoW would make pointless to even think at making event that don't happen where your colonist are.

That's the first and foremost argument against fow that is constantly brought up. While i agree at a certain degree, i must bring to attention, again, that FoW doesn't negate or extinct any of those events. It might, at most, delay or provide an obstacle, but never prevent.

The events described in the post of the link could, in its majority, work exactly the same under fow, and some other could work with a few peculiar differences, not to mention the others that could happen specifically because of fow.

Then, even if you are not able to watch or interfere with events, the consequences are there, and if people feel the need to absolutely watch every single thing that happens in the game (which is impossible even with omniscience) and feel cheated for not observing it, then i guess fow could be perceived as bad, but really, it's not like you don't get the opportunity to watch the same events regularly.

"Ex : if you had planned to have two factions fight on your territory for example it would require a "scout" to reach the place in time to see it, and waste more time if you want to intervene.
The problem stay even if you are notified and given hint on the place it happen (notice which defeat 80% of the reason to have a fog in the first place)."

That's because the game just throws events without warning or prompts. Even with omni you might not have the time to intervene, specially with large maps. The thrill of FoW is managing what sort of risks you want to take and how far you're willing to scout that scene, and since this is a management game, these sort of decision making interests me.

Then, you have the fact that you can overcome FoW and no, overcoming FoW or giving notifications/cues doesn't equal making it redundant as much as starting with a pistol and getting a rifle later makes the pistol so, or having a wood fence being replaced by a stone wall. Starting with no idea of your surroundings and living on a wood house and then evolving to a large walled colony full of sensors and cameras doesn't erase your earlier strive to achieve this stage, on contrary, it make it so more relevant.

Obviously there's the "Once per game" scene that you would love to see and remember for discussion on the forum. aside I just realized it must be useful for debugging

True, but i gotta be honest and say that everything is "once per game", and most of the cool stuff happens within view or your own pawns, and random battles are not rare, so it's really not novel after some time, specially if you have a few colonies under your belt. I guess this is just personal taste so there's really no arguing here, you might mind it more than i do so there's just that. Regarding debugging: maybe you can disable FoW for that?

"- If you have entity/groups wandering by the colony for various reason, and you want to interact with them it will take time to see what happen, gather your pawn and intercept (to say : invite to drink a beer), so best avoid a scouting hassle that fundamentally only make you waste time."

Good one. At least two ways to handle this:
FoW approach: imagine you are in this colony in a hostile world and then friendlies come to visit you. Do you and your friends just go about your business or you keep eyes on these strangers? You can go about your chores an leave them be, interacting as you go (not sure if in a10 they still hang in a single area?), but losing sight if there's no one around. But then that's a security risk. Or you could keep someone watching them, some sort of hosting job, drafting or patrolling (like patrol/guard a pawn or area). But that's an economic risk. Again, decisions. It might seem like a chore, but remember that it's a management game, and some people like these kind of decisions.
Lenient approach: Simply all visitors share LoS with you. You see what they see, at least after they reach your "hang out" area.

"- Any information on enemy, ally, animal. We don't want to consider them just as "meat" right ?"

Surely wouldn't want that! But i'm sure you could see those informations once they get within sight (pawn or sensor). Again, overcoming a disadvantage is part of the fun, at least for some. Automatically knowing all there is to know about every single creature is boring, imo.

"- Knowing what an AI is attacking first, so you can guess if they actually got around your defense of it it's luck."

Again, that's another challenging aspect of fow, not a bad thing. You could send some people there after a fight to see how they got past, most probably there will be a hole in the wall and some other wall could be damaged, prompting you to increase defense there or even put some people there next time. You don't "waste" time checking it out, that's part of the game. Also, knowing where every enemy is coming and going is what makes battles predictable and bureaucratic "oh, thats raider wave #17, cool i guess". 

"- Visitor/ally/enemy loosing items while passing/fleeing away from your colonist."

I guess it happens. I wouldn't feel cheated by not acquiring something that was lost, specially if i didn't put effort in it, such as seeing an enemy with a nifty weapon fleeing towards a direction and not sending anyone after it, but i sure would feel rewarded if i found stuff by indeed having people look for it, or a hunter finding it by chance.
It's not like FoW prevents this for happening, it justs makes it more challenging, which is a feature not a problem.

"- Visitor/ally/enemy getting lost in fog (who said you had to be the one blind here ?)"

Yes! That would be cool wouldn't? I mean, if we could lose people, the AI should be worked to lose us/each other as well. Perhaps a tracking system could be implemented, in which pawns (or pawns with a tracker trait) had a chance to follow footprints and some terrains would make following easy, others not so much.

"- avoiding potentially important items meant for storytelling getting damaged/stolen because you can't afford making a important colonist into a mindless patrol drone just to know it was here."

Not sure about the existence of such items, at least of yet, nor if items can be stolen, but i'm sure we can think of ways to prevent such story-items from disappearing. Then again, losing or getting them damaged is an story itself, and a pawn patrolling isn't anymore mindless than a pawn growing stuff or crafting. I don't get why all the hate on patrolling besides not giving a palpable result, if security isn't one. Well, i guess some might be annoyed by having to manage one extra thing, but adding patrolling isn't any more wrong than if in RW we didn't have to take care of growing and feeding our pawns and then growing and eating was introduced in a patch. It wouldn't be any more wrong than adding patrolling, except for personal reasons and preferences.

"- if a stampede of Buffalo pass, why hide the spectacle ?"

Not that this game is any skyrim but i get your point. But then, like in skyrim, the beauty imho is seeing things as you go. So perhaps every 6 months a herd pass by the same area, you might get warned or prompted by texts or perhaps game cues like sound and footprints, then one time you decide or happen to watch one (or you finally get your sensors to open the area). The extra effort, imo, make it more impactant. Again, FoW doesn't prevent the event, just makes it more challenging.

But sure, i could only agree with you that, if this only happened once, then it's something that we'd lose by having FoW, but I don't see why herd migrations should be a one time event.

"- There's a Migrating herd and you don't want to need scout/patrol/lucky blind hunter to know."

Similar to above, only that i'd add: If you don't need, then don't bother, although the question should be "why aren't we hunting the herd?".

Again, you're not wrong, it's personal taste, but for me there's no novelty after you see the same event two or thrice.

"- Animals starting to eats food from recent drop pod or simply doing animal-stuff (could be relaxing to watch while your colonist work their ass off)"

I agree with you on this one (who says we have to disagree on everything right?), although i got to point that LoS might reach enough for you to experience that, perhaps not as much. Then, early game (in my mind) should be tense enough for you to care more about survival rather than relaxing watching animals (like hunting said animals), and a larger established colony could/should have means to increase LoS or reveal the area so you enjoy just as you did.

Quick reminder: FoW doesn't prevent such events or behaviors, they might at best challenge or delay it. Overcoming LoS doesn't erase what you had to fight until you overcame it, it doesn't make FoW obsolete or redundant.

"- If a psychic probes is making all animal fight each other, you'll want a global view."

Meh, never cared for that, or even remember seeing it, but i guess mileage may vary. Either way, the above applies here aswell.

"- If a psychic probes (what if yours ?) is making raider/visitor insane, you'll want to see it even if they are away."

Yes, if people want to have everything in control and perfect (see what, how and why the enemy is doing without putting effort), else you could send people there, or apply the above.

"- If there's heavy terrain/climate change (agreed FoW proponent usually agree to see the terrain)"

Not sure i understand. Yes, usually FoW allows for you to see terrain or at least keep it after being explored. Terrain and climate changes should be felt with or without FoW? I mean, surely it takes effect in the whole map.

"- If there's a predator lurking around and you don't want it to depend on a "must kill" Events you can prefer to be able to check on him without requiring a constant scout/patrol"

Avoid AI behavior could handle that, or behavior settings, such as aggressive, defensive, coward, etc. Such as set your gatherers to run from hostiles on sight or to change path so to avoid it (which is something we need with or without FoW), and hunters to shoot hostiles on sight.

Then we can have novelty stuff, like tracking guns or sound cues. Or we could manage them, which is way Tynan set a low population count for the game.

Either way, if you know there's a dangerous animal lurking and don't take precautions, then it's on you.

"- Poisonous gas around geyser (seen indirectly on animal getting sick)"

Not sure i understand that one. I don't see how FoW prevents that.

"- Invasive flora, like carnivorous flora (Feed me !!!!) or just plants growing around your installation.
- Invasive fauna, (not notified because they are natural/not too dangerous) like say beaver cutting tree.
- possible abandoned trap (seen only by the player, not the colonist)"

Not sure how FoW prevents any of that. If the plague/fauna is encroaching on your stuff, you should be able to see. Noting that the entire map is suffering from that only after it reaches you (which should be rare, because there's hunting) could make for some ompf story "all hands on plant cutting, NOW!".

Don't know about traps (is there traps now?), but if the colonists can't see it i don't see why you should. I mean, why would any other game out there that have traps would show it to you? Isn't the point of a trap to trap you? Unless of course the pawn perceive the trap, then it either don't activate it or it warns you.

"- Visitor looking at a statue you put far away from the base for reasons."

Well, it could be a camera statue! Or visitors could share LoS, as above. Either way, FoW doesn't prevent that from happening.

- Raider getting killed trying to steal a trapped statue you put far away from base.

I guess those statue traps (didn't knew they were a thing) could provide a small LoS. Or it just adds to the challenge that FoW provides. "Hmm, i'd better check that trap, see if someone activated it... Oh, there's the corpse, yep it activated alright, i hope you don't mind parting with that rifle mr."

Last with an important aspect : combat tactic
This is not just "combat stuff", the tactic you try/use have a relevance in how you want to write your story. If you aren't given the information and time you need to attempt plan like "attack at night" you won't even try.
Right now the AI is dumb & focused on mindless destruction, but if it was smarter and less predictable, omniscience could be not a luxury, nor a cheat, but a required balance.

FoW or the concept of FoW (such as a FPS game where you don't know where is the enemy) doesn't so much prevent you to do stuff as much as it makes you work for it. With FoW all options are open, they might not work, but they are there for you to take your shot. Omniscience not so much. Would you send a single guy after 10? No, you'd pick 5 guys with snipers and pick them off one by one. If there's a guy flanking around, you prepare for that. Everything is laid out for you and you only lose if you're bad at math or get a bad luck roll.

Now, that may seem like extra effort or that it would only work against players, but it really doesn't. I mean, sure with the current A.I and raiding frequency and amount FoW would make it unbearable, but should it be implemented i'm sure the game would be rebalanced around it (which is why a toggle on/off is not the best of ideas). The A.I could simulate being lost as much as you, although i can see why it could be a hard programming task. Hard, not impossible and not unworthy imho.

Then, the challenge of betting on a tactic and the rush of executing it is the thrill of FoW. "It's night. Do i send a scout? Yes. Ok i found them and they haven't noticed me. Do i shoot a couple of them and run or do i go back silently? Do i spend the night watching them until they start attacking or i get him back to give him rest? Do i arm my other pawns and mount an assault or do i wait in the safety of my town? Will it be enough? How many should i send? How many should stay? Who? What positions?" These are the sort of decisions that while do happen to certain degree with omni, they are devoid of any real conflict, they create somewhat predictable stories.

I can understand why some people who are more attuned to the building aspect of the game could be put off by this more intense experience, but that's why there's director's like phoebe builder and challenge %, and there's no shame in that, but that's hardly a problem with FoW or FoW not matching RW (which is not true) than personal play style. Btw, these different playstyles the game attracts is a peculiarity of rimworld, being such a hybrid and in early development it really is "deciding" what to be, which is why we have so many and diverging suggestions popping around. But that's a digress.

The WONDERFUL Eye of the storyteller is what give all the tension to this event.
To quote the king of suspense, Alfred Hitchcock :
�There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two."

In our case, seeing there is wolf around and wondering when, if they do, one will attack your colonist, is the tension. You'll be continually torn between keeping all your colonist safe or letting them work, never knowing if suddenly the pack of wolf will change course.

And what if a colonist was outside when a Wolf pack event start ? If you are blind, you'll simply ask him to get back ASAP in straight line hoping he don't meet one. With the great Eye of the storyteller you can SEE if the wolf pack will intercept him and have him stop, run away in a non-ideal direction until you can prepare a rescue party. (which if the survival was based on blind-luck, would be pointless)

Although you bring a good quote, the comparison is not applicable: Hitchcock is talking about movies while this is a game. You can show and pull suspense in a movie because the audience can't interact, nothing they say will stop the monster to appear or the plane to explode.

Omniscient rimworld Has no suspense, only surprise and only for a short amount. Once an event starts it's usually an instant surprise  at the edge of the map with plenty of time to react in the best of manner. There's no "your sensors pick up a large amount of raiders moving your way" and then them showing just a day later. No, people just pop in.
There's no build-up, only raw tension, as yourself said it. . It's just math= "With my speed and that wolves speed, can i reach safety? It's not bad, it's just devoid of any suspense or dread.

FoW, on the other hand, provides both. If you think it does not, just think that FoW in games provides an experience closer to real life than omniscience. I mean, we all have felt suspense and surprise in our lives, haven't we? And we surely aren't omniscient.

Sure, if you only get owned by wolves out of nowhere, that's only surprise, but i'm thinking all sort of cues and clues could be given. What's more iconic than wolves howling? If there's wolves howling then there's wolves around. If there's wolves around then they could attack you, uh-oh! You could even "hear" the direction of the sounds, approaching you.  They might get to you, or they might not!

Phew, that's it. That's a long ass post, i don't blame people for not reading it. Anyway, have in mind that my detailed response isn't personal nitpick antagonizing, as some previous people have taken it, but just reflects my interest in the subject and duty for the interlocutor.

[Kegereneku]

< Message & double post erased voluntarily >

...this post was way too long, and is way too... targeted. Pointless to read for everyone.
I'll post it in private

[Mikhail Reign]

Obviously here I expected you to go all nuts about turning Rimworld into a wargame
My colonist AREN'T soldier, and if you say I'm not "working hard" to defeat raider in the current Alpha I should say : "Go f*ck yourself condescending idiot ! I'm playing a bunch of survivor not a Para-military army. And who are you to talk anyway ? It could be only by luck the storyteller let you have the right equipments and right pawn to fight weak enemy ! Go make a X-com Mod if you want it so much !"
But politely I'll only imply it and say that to make it work (which obviously is the only point for you to have FoW) you need the whole setup of a Wargame or it will only be (more) luck-based.

Uhh. You need to look up the definition of imply...

But yeah this topic will probably get closed - you guys are just making personal jabs at each other, and then saying 'and everyone wants it this way' when the only information that you have is a forum poll with 40 results (considering the game has sold tens of thousands of copies that's really nothing at all).