Movement bug when enemy spotted

Lets say your movement allowed is 8 tiles and your movement gets paused twice because you see a enemy then your movement allowed drops by one giving you only seven tiles.
You get penalised for spotting the enemy? That’s a little harsh isn’t it?

Do you get charged action points for pausing when spotting a enemy? This is the only reason besides a bug that this would happen.

1 Like

This is thought to be a bug and not a feature but no one’s sure… there’s a canny post for it, be sure to vote it up:

1 Like

I believe it is a known bug and one that they “thought” was fixed.

1 Like

Any volunteers to tell them it’s not? :smiley:

I seem to remember a setting to turn off pause on enemy sighting. It’s a pain anyway.

1 Like

I will bite, already gave this scenario on another thread… Alright Southlane, say your walking beside a beautiful girl (or boy…whichever is your pleasure)…then from behind, a person steals that girls purse and runs up around the corner. Now I am assuming you would be the type of person to chase down the perp and beat them senseless…big assumption for you…as I do not know you…but if you chose to take the high road and chase the perp down. As you round the corner of the alley way that he ducked in…he is holding a .45 directly at your head.

Now I have actually retired from the military. Even though I have all that training and many deployments…I still pause and maybe in some fear that a gun is pointed at me…Think of that pause as 1 AP…This, what some call a bug…to me it is normal, thus I am speculating that the developers maybe had a hightened sense of awareness of such instances to include that in the game…totally speculating as I said b4…but this feature has been in the game since it was developed…if it is a “bug” …they would of squashed it long ago.

Now, this happened to me in RL…I was running to a rock for cover fire and behind that rock was my enemy…It really threw my intentions off and I hit the ground ASAP as my buddy killed the guy.

1 Like

Imagine your at war and it’s time to go over the top. Over you go and you see a enemy, you stop and take in the handsome features of the enemy. You start to run again only to see another enemy, Oh, time to stop again and check out this new handsome enemy, Of you go again but not for long. Up pops another enemy, so you stop to ad…
Fine. Just so long as I can turn off the stupid feature, along with its stupid brother, RF.

1 Like

I did give you a real life scenario that happened to me (I do not need to imagine)… It is unrealistic that in RL…you would continue to run and see many different enemies before your shot.

This is war time not a wander down the shops. If our soldiers stopped every time they seen a enemy when positioning we wouldn’t have any soldiers. And I know for a fact I wouldn’t stop dead and stand there like a twit. At best I would hit the dirt.

1 Like

Exactly…u see enemy, you hit the dirt. You do not progress on to size your enemy as you would be killed in the example you gave. Then we have ear pieces that we can tell our squad on enemy position (hence why my m8 killed the enemy behind the rock I was vectored for. this game has AP… it took me 1 AP in RL to hit the dirt and let my buddy kill the one that may have killed me. Not seeing why you not making the analogy??

I’m trying to do the game a favour. The game will get hammered for these so called features or bugs when the game goes live on steam. I don’t think any of us want to see it go into the negative on it’s first day. I can’t see the loss of AP for pausing and return fire going down well, but I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.

Although I can see this making sense, I’m with Southlane here… this will mostly be interpreted as a bug (which it probably is) specially because it’s inconsistent, sometimes you lose AP, sometimes you don’t. Unless it’s explained somewhere, be it in the tutorial or in loading tips, it looks like a bug.

1 Like

I have a vague idea of ​​where this behaviour could be coming from. It may be a simple math problem that is not very easy to solve. In PP the movement to a target (to tile dx, dy) is directly in one line (vector) without walking through all the tiles in between step by step. This is generally nice but could lead to some problems and maybe also like the one mentioned here.

Hiding details and maths for anyone who don't want to read something like this (klick the little triangle in front of this line if you want to read more of my vague assumptions)

A prominent example for such a direct vector move would be a movement to a destination tile in dx = 3, dy = 4. If we assume that the movement from tile to tile in x or y direction requires 1 movement point (MP) (which is given in PP), then it costs exactly 5 MP to this destination (sqrt (3^2 + 4^2) = 5). If you move from tile to tile instead, such a move costs more because it is no longer a movement in a direct line to the destination, you always have to take a detour, e.g. one step to the side and then 3 diagonally (1 + 3 x sqrt (2) ~ 5.24).
All in all, this sounds good so far, it enables straightforward and also more realistic movements in a fair radius even in a squared tileset and is done exactly that way in many today’s games with such an environment.

But now the problem:
If such a straight diagonal movement as in the above example (dx = 3, dy = 4) is interrupted somewhere in the middle (an enemy is sighted), then you end up on a tile that is definitely not in the direct line from the starting point to the original destination, i.e. you make a stopover with a detour. In total, you now need more than 5 MP to reach the destination, i.e. you can no longer reach it with the same number of MP as originally planned.

If that is the case, then in my opinion it is basically not a bug at all and accordingly there will probably not be a very simple solution. Rounding the movement costs in favor of the player would be a possibility, but it could also lead to strange side effects where in certain situations you can suddenly move more than originally planned. Likewise, it might not even be able to cover all cases where you can ‘lose’ MP, maybe when it comes to moving around some obstacle.

Of course, they can also just make the entire feature (stop moving when spot an enemy) optional. Maybe not a bad option. But please don’t remove it at all, I personally like the base function and can live with the downside by sometimes losing one MP.


Good explanation. I guess this would not be a problem if the worst offender did not exist, which is when you’re in a tile, and on your very first move you spot an enemy, stay at the same tile, and lose AP.

One possible way of making it less problematic / more realistic is just letting the soldier make the latest movement when spotting an enemy instead of preventing it, such as this:
1 - Soldier is in a building corner, no enemy is seen
2 - Soldier would walk to dx = 3, dy =4. Soldier sees an enemy just as he leaves position but will also see 3 more enemies before completing the first AP move.
3 - Game takes the soldier to the nearest position to path (dx = 1, dy = 1, let’s say) and ONLY THEN stops movement, instead of stopping movement before the current move is completed.
4 - Soldier is now in the open and sees 4 enemies at the same time, instead of one by one.

The problem will remain, the soldier won’t reach the same spot anymore, but it’s more natural than losing one AP while staying at the same spot. Also, you get to see all enemies at once instead of one by one which is very annoying and time-consuming sometimes.

The last difference is that you commit to at least one move, and I think it should be that way as you chose to leave the spot you were in and only saw the enemy after you left. In the current form the player becomes confused as to “why wasn’t I seeing the enemy and now I am, if it’s the same spot?”.


Good Idea :+1:

This is for me more a bug and somewhat easy to solve, because when you don’t leave your starting tile then it should also not cost you any MP (just not to get confused, MP != AP, 1 AP = sumMP/4, we can also call MP time units, so TU).

IMO your suggestion would be of course better than doing only such a simple fix.


In terms how jerky anim of stopping looks like, and that you still sometimes lose AP, hope this will be fixed with 1.8.1 and onward. With so many fixes it seems PP 2.0 plus is the real deal >:)