It's a shame that while fog is what makes Warlight such an interesting game, it also means that you can't watch a game while it's being played. Obviously cheating would be a problem if spectators could see the whole board, but what if they were allowed to see just the territories, orders and history that *both* players have seen and can currently see? I think it would be fun for the spectator to guess which territories each player has and what their attacks will be based on just seeing the "front lines", but at the same time you wouldn't know anything either player doesn't already know so you couldn't help them cheat.

I believe there is a uservoice about this idea already being voted on..

Thanks for pointing that out. It needs more votes. :)

@ "if they were allowed to see just the territories, orders and history that both players have seen and can currently see" ....

when a match is in progress , both players could only see their own history ....

well as a spectator , if someone want to see both player's history ,.. then it could also lead to the ultimate process of cheating.

can you pls post the uservoice link here ?

"@ "if they were allowed to see just the territories, orders and history that both players have seen and can currently see"
when a match is in progress , both players could only see their own history ...."

when you review one players history mid-game, he can still see the opposing players moves when it was already cleared by that players FOW..
the original comment meant to clear -*for spectators*- area's who's FOW has been cleared by all players, when they are cleared by all players.. this could be interesting in 1v1's, but ultimately worthless in ffa's, and could still be used to cheat to determine when someone uses a spy type card.

Isn't it already the way it is for no-fog games ? Could be already a way to make active games available for spectators, though I'm not sure. Could be extended according to Ridin's idea, although may it's delicate to implement, I don't know, ask Fizzer ^^
Would be interesting, still.

Here's the [link.](http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/1999091-during-spectating-those-countries-which-are-seen-?ref=title)
I was thinking in the context of standard 1v1, 2v2 and other two-team games where fog applies. This wouldn't work in FFA games of course. I haven't used spy cards but I'm not sure why they would be a problem.

i voted ....

sorry , i had analyzed this post through a wrong way ...

When BP, Ruthless and others were running the membership challenge matches, I wanted to be able to follow games live and guess what would happen next. Surely I wasn't the only one?!

Aziridine, picture this, 1v1, spy cards usable.. when you use a spy card with standard options only you know you used it.
when you use the Spy card, for instance, you can see all of target players territories.. with this premise, it would mean suddenly the spectators can see all of the spied players territories.. now in 1v1 with fog you often move with the expectation that the enemy won't know where your armies are precisely.. obviously the spy'er will know the locations of the spy'ees armies.. now the observer can note *oh, wow, look at all of player B's armies!* and then player B now knows player A has used a spy card, and can react accordingly, thus slightly weakening the ability of the spy card.

and that's presuming the observer *isn't* attempting to cheat, and just makes an idle comment that gives away information that could be important in a close game..

and Mian, the fog applies to *everyone that views the game* no fog means no fog.. normal fog means you can see your territs and all adjacent territs.. well observers have *no* territs, so naturally the map is blank to them

Gotcha. Yeah it would have to be turned off in games with spy cards then.

I also brought [this](http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/1920685-spectating-practice-games) to UV some time ago. Could be a way to manage live watching.

Aziridine, you must subscribe to Playboy or Maxim for the articles and enjoy watching the plots of porn movies too. lol Personally, I wouldn't want to watch someone else play, unless it were a 1 v 1 with 2 of the best players or a 3 v 3 with 6 of the best.

I find meta-gaming in general to be rather dull, if I ever end up in the Impallers range, I'd probably quit the ladder... of course that same mentality keeps me from Impallers range ;)

@Philippe Auguste: You're one to talk, Mr. "I've been studying the Impaller's 1v1 ladder games this one move he made was so darn cool." ;)

lol

Spy cards could work fine; just don't make this feature show anything to spectators that was revealed by a spy card. (I too have wished I could watch fogged games.)

The problem is not just spy cards. Imagine a situation where the front lines are nearing each other, but haven't actually touched yet. Let's take the standard "Earth" map (the version with 153 territories) as an example:
-- Player A started in Brazil and is trying to gain control of the whole South America bonus. Since he already has Brazil, he can see Nigeria.
-- Player B started in North-Africa and has already occupied it completely. He can also see Nigeria.
-- Note that the players cannot see each other yet and have no way of knowing how close their opponent actually is.

In this situation, both players can see Nigeria, so spectators could also see Nigeria. However, telling the players that, would reveal a small (yet important!) piece of information to them.
For instance, if Player B performs an "ah well, why not" attack on Nigeria, which fails, Player A sees the unsuccessful attack and knows his enemy is close, *without* this knowledge being available to Player B, giving Player A a small tactical advantage. Making this information available to spectators (and hence, we must assume, to players) alters the game mechanics, which is at odds with the concept of a "spectator".

That does kinda sound like a good idea to me!