Just as a sidenote here, instead of answering the question "what do I need in and AMP", I'd like to just answer the "WHY do I need an AMP" and why I feel frustrated by its absence.
From the beginning, Command has been a very realistic game, and since its initial release, many features were added, including many details in order to simulate the specifics of modern combat systems. It has grown into an even more impressive game, allowing to reproduce very complex engagements.
Now in such engagements, the difference between success and a complete failure often lies in the details. To get the best military effect out of your modern assets, you usually need a good synchonization between all your assets, and careful planning. In the air part of Command, I feel frustated because I sometimes have a plan in my head, and basically feels that it is really difficult to realize not because it is not doable, but because I am limited by the tools at my disposal.
And moreover, I have the feeling that the process itself is not realistic. In real operations, you start by carefully preparing your strike (defining flight plans, synchonizing various assets and so on). And when in real time, you make adjustments to cope with the unexpected (which WILL happen almost everytime !). My biggest gripe with the air part of Command is that you have to make adjustments even before the unexpected happens because you cannot even pre plan the waypoints. So when a complex strike is starting, you have to catch every flight (sometimes difficult to distinguish when they depart in sequence), and manually plot each flight as they are already airborne. This is REALLY A LOT of micro management and feels discouraging to start all over and try a new strategy.
For me an advanced strike planner woud be an awesome addition, and would reveal the full potential of this game. If it is optional to use it or not depending on the mission, I don't see how it would render things more complex for begiiners. If done properly, it has the potential to really alleviate the real time workload in complex scenarii.
Now I do agree with lots of things that have been said above. Especially with the fact that I feel it is clearly a better idea to have "ideal AMP" target in mind, but start with a version 1.0 that would only have the most essential features (for me: ability to prepare a flight plan with levels and speeds, synchronize elements of a package and if possible tanker support) in order to see it come to fruition.
I really hope the dev team will decide it is worth their efforts.
Once again, thanks a lot to the dev team for at least allowing such an interesting discussion and taking the time to listen to our feedback. Whatever your decision, given the workload we are talking about, it will be perfectly respectable.
Very well said.
Let me Pre-Plan the strike before launching the package. The ability to create ingress/egress routes for multiple flights; to have timing triangles built in; to have designated launch points with Time to Impact information; to have pop-up windows which will help guide me as to the best altitude and airspeed to launch the weapon against THAT target; to see how much fuel is required at each point to follow the route and RTB; to see if that is a shortfall in internal/external fuel; these are the details which allow for competent use of modern air assets and give a chance of success.
The crux is the ability to pause the game and pre-plane a coordinated strike.