RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series

[Poll]

CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests


AMP - Time-on-target automatic strike generator UI
  28% (134)
AMP - Continuous coverage planner
  1% (7)
Scriptless downed/stranded crew (for CSAR)
  2% (11)
Local weather fronts
  10% (48)
Scriptless intermittent sensor settings
  1% (9)
Custom draw on map
  2% (11)
WEGO MP
  3% (17)
Real-time MP
  10% (51)
Scriptless carry-over of units between scenarios
  4% (19)
Ground operations: Make units recognize and use roads
  5% (25)
AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff
  3% (18)
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into ScenEdit
  6% (30)
Warning shots
  1% (9)
Scriptless boarding actions
  0% (3)
Integrated speech-to-text (SeaHag-style)
  2% (11)
Tacview - AAR mode
  4% (21)
Chemical & Biological weapon effects
  1% (9)
Display real-time sonar/self-noise data
  0% (4)
Make A2A-refueling options a doctrine setting
  0% (2)
Have WRA ranges for weapons set in percentage of range rather than 5nm
  0% (2)
Unit "Scoreboard"
  0% (3)
"Search" tool for the cargo list
  0% (1)
Weather/Day-night affects air sorties
  1% (8)
Allow Lua scripting on Losses/Expenditures (for player-tailored stats)
  0% (1)
Enable borders/coastlines at close-in zoom
  2% (12)
Hotkeys for built-in map layers
  0% (1)


Total Votes : 467
(last vote on : 9/16/2021 2:13:32 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message


Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 8:52:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

I'd really love to have a search tool for the cargo list.


Added.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:12:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LMychajluk

Instead of just showing the Score, how about a more detailed breakdown once the Scenario is ended? Most of the info is already in Losses/Expenditures, but maybe summarize / compare it?

Something like, by unit types (5th Gen Fighters, 4th Gen Fighters, bombers, DDG, etc...):
"You lost 35% less <Unit Types> vs. the Enemy", or
"You lost 1 DDG vs. 3 enemy DDGs lost"

You can even break down expenditure by Weapon Type -
"You expended 135 BVR AA weapons vs. the enemy's 158". (Basically, one line per unit / weapon type.)

Yes, it may be lopsided in some scenarios (like an Air Force vs Naval Units), but that's OK.
"You expended 39 Long Range SAMS vs the enemy's 0"
"You expended 0 Guided Air-To-Ground Weapons vs the enemy's 32"
"You lost 0 Multi-Role Attack Aircraft vs the enemy's 5"
"You lost 1 Frigate vs. the enemy's 0"

It may take a minute to crunch the numbers, but it only needs to happen once at the end of the scenario.

Maybe even add the ability (via LUA events?) for Scenario Authors to include their own items to the summary, like "3 out of 4 Primary Targets Destroyed", or "Significant (>80%) of enemy air losses incurred."


That's hugely open-ended. It is impossible for us to know in advance what metrics each player is interested in. You think "I shot more AA missiles than you" is important, I think "my virtual sailors look cooler in black tights" is more important [:D].

What _could_ help would be to enable custom scripts to run at that screen so that interested players could generate the statistics that they are personally interested in. Added this as an item on the poll.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:13:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DONNIE67
planes that are airborne should be added to the flight ops screen.


??? Why?




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:15:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

I really wish there was a way to disable the new feature of borders and coastlines fading out as you zoom in. Currently, the lines disappear completely at a camera altitude of 400 km, which makes it really hard to set up "border-clash" scenarios or exclusion zones, or fine-tuned navigation (since the satellite map doesn't always overlap the actual coast). I don't quite understand what prompted such a change...


Added.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:15:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ultradave
There may be a technical reason why they aren't there anymore, but would it be possible to bring back some more of the speed-up options?

I find the 15 sec, 1 minute and 5 minute options really useful in submarine scenarios where movement is very slow, or where significant movement needs to happen to close range. The current flaming afterburner speed is a little drastic on my machine, and I find myself nervously ready to stop it before it gets out of hand.

This is definitely a low priority request and nothing that is broken.


1-15sec is coming back, on the next update.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:17:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oomiz

The thing I absolutely miss the most is a simple volume control.
Not actually a gameplay request and probably a much smaller fix than most things on that list.
But forgetting to adjust the volume mixer on mission startup and getting your ears blown off gets old really quick.


This was already added.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:18:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: boogabooga

In Aircraft entries in the Database, I think that it would make more sense to put the hyperlinks to the weapons DB entries in with the Aircraft Stores, rather than Aircraft Loadouts. That way, when one looks through the stores and thinks "what is that one?," the hyperlink is right there, no need to comb through loadouts to try to find it again. Also, the hyperlinks are easier to click on in the stores section because there is more space between them.

The CMNAO way of putting them in BOTH places is fine, too.


? Can you post a few pics to demonstrate this?




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:20:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bns130
Ability to natively import GeoTIFF maps into the scenario editor.

Just imagery rasters or actual elevation data? The former is already possible IIRC.

quote:


Ability to georectify a jpeg or png image for use as a map.

This is best left to actual GIS programs IMHO.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:21:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TalonCG2

Feature request - Logistics and transport of supplies

I love the larger, more complex and longer lasting scenarios. This wouldn't really apply to short duration scenarios, but here goes...

Fuel, either a generic non-specific all use, or broken up into categories of ship/aviation/ground unit. Transported by rail, truck, ship or plane to other "frontline" bases.
Munitions, generic "ammo" that will increase by a fixed amount determined by capacity of the transport and what units call the base their home. Or a more complex and specific transport of individual weapons/ammo.

The generic versions would be easier to implement, but not as realistic, but a good compromise over specific items.

Thoughts?


This is one of the things being worked on.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:22:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

Request: Investigate contact.

if a contact flies into a patrol area, friendlies will autonomously investigate to make an ID. They only need to fly close enough for the sensors to do that.

Conversely if there is no such patrol area (or contact is outside it), there is no way to investigate other than setting an intercept course by estimating "close enough".

I suggest adding an "investigate" action, so that an aircraft will fly just close enough to make the ID (with current EMCON). Thereafter it returns to its prior mission/posture. This could also work for surface & land contacts.


Isn't this already possible, by setting the investigator's contact-relevant WCS to tight/hold ?




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:23:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeDiameterBomb

I have a feature request that I hope shouldn't be too complicated to implement but that I (and presumably other people as well) would find quite useful.

My suggestion is simply that CMO should include short keys to switch from these brand new and so beautiful different map types. I find myself needing to switch between maps quite often in any scenario where much of the action happens over land (Typical example: the great scenario Under African Skies) as opposed to scenarios where action is over the sea.


Since we necessarily live in the best of all possible worlds, as the philosopher Leibniz so wisely said, where the institutionalized slaughter of other men and women in the form we call war is a regular feature of life and with the existence of war being a prerequisite for the construction of the greatest game ever developed, there also happens to be exactly 12 items on the View roll down menu in CMO that deals with maps and surely it can't be a mere coincidence that a standard QWERTY keyboard also has 12 function keys.

It is obvious that these items (Map Lat/Long Grid, Sentinel-2 satellite map, BMNG Layer... Day + Night Lightning and 3D View) were meant to be paired with these function keys, for example Alt + F1... F12 or Maybe Alt + Shift + F1... F12 or whatever else pairings the developers prefer to choose.

Surely we live in the best of all possible worlds! Why would God, in his omnipotence and all-goodness, construct a world which is not the the best possible?


Still, I of course understand that the developers are occupied with more important work for the time being and don't expect this to be implemented with anything like the highest priority if the developers thinks it's a reasonable idea.


PS. Some sarcasm and humor can be found in this post and it should not be taken as a criticism of any religion - only of the philosophy of Gottfried W Leibniz.


Added.




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 9:25:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stefanoc

I request some standard armor (light for AIFV, heavy for Tanks) for improving land battles (for now some M16 can destroy Tanks) [:(]


It can? That sounds like a bug. Can you please open up a new thread on Tech Support, with a suitable save? Thanks.




DONNIE67 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/27/2019 10:03:15 AM)

Hi. Thank you for reaching out.

Ideally the air ops display should provide a one stop, all inclusive view of the status of all air assets uassigned to the base or carrier. I have been jotting down units as a work around for larger scenarios in instances prior to formalizing a mission.

While the airborne units could be indirectly found by using the orbat or mission editor, I have found this to be a bit more out of the way than a simple status flight ops screen which gives an excellent accounting of all units to begin with.

I also vaguely recall such an indication in an earlier version of cmano. The but "airborne" status came immediately after "taking off" and then disappeared from the status board right after.






xan2622 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 7:55:36 AM)

Original thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4733864

I wish CMO could feature the bittorrent protocol, as an alternate way to download all map/layers tiles in the background.
There are several libraries available for .Net: https://github.com/search?l=C%23&o=desc&q=net+bittorrent&s=stars&type=Repositories

And once all tiles are downloaded on a player's computer, then, CMO could start seeding the images to other players, in the background.
This way, long time players would help other new players get the map images in the cache folder.




xan2622 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 8:11:55 AM)

Original thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4738341

Seeing a fullscreen loading screen (when a player has chosen the windowed mode for CMO) is a bit strange (imo).
I suggest to integrate it into the launcher itself, making it a real launcher (with a progress bar). This way, the CMO window could be able to load in the background.





xan2622 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 8:27:43 AM)

Original thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4729860

Please allow/let your players help you translate the game. [&o]
Translating the game in other languages is probably out of your scope (too much time consuming), that's why I would like you to authorize fan made translations of the game (CMO UI and descriptions).

I noticed that aircrafts & ships descriptions are stored in .txt files in the \Command - Modern Operations\DB\Descriptions\ folder (so those are quite easily translatable, it would take a long time to translate them but it's doable).
But, I couldn't find the location of the words/strings that the interface is made of (menus, options, etc). I guess those are those hardcoded. [:(]

I noticed some .resx files in \Command - Modern Operations\Launcher\Localization\
And thanks to this software: https://github.com/tom-englert/ResXResourceManager it's possible to translate words/sentenses stored in these .resx files.
It would be cool if the UI strings were also available as a .resx file...




xan2622 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 8:32:26 AM)

Original thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4729705

There doesn't seem to be possible to modify hotkeys.
I have only found a window (in the HELP menu) that lists all hotkeys but it seems that there is no option to customize them all.

I have found two projects that could inspire you (maybe) to implement this feature.
https://github.com/mrousavy/Hotkeys
https://github.com/thomaslevesque/NHotkey

It would be really convenient to let players customize hotkeys.




xan2622 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 8:49:20 AM)

Original thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4726213

To reduce the bandwidth needed to transfer maps textures & help the game engine load map tiles, I suggest to use another file type for the images, WEBP for instance.







stefanoc -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 1:36:40 PM)

For the problem of M16 that can destroy tanks: after numerous tests, the problem has not reoccurred, it must have been a bug but I can't replicate it to send a save, now everything works regularly, I apologize for the hasty report!




MikeKozlowski -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/28/2019 3:17:57 PM)

...Would very much like to ask if we could get an "ignore terrain" option such as the one Harpoon has. There's quite a few places on the map that are more than capable of handling CV sized ships, but they show as land - for instance, in my hometown of Lorain, OH, the Black River is capable of handling 1000 foot long iron ore carriers, but shows as solid ground on the map. The Mississippi River at St. Louis, MO, shows as solid ground with an elevation of 400 feet. This would open up a LOT of coastal and riverine warfare options, as well as give us the ability to simulate the Chinese island bases in the Pacific.

I understand completely that this may be a map issue that can't readily be addressed, so an Ignore Terrain option might be the best possible option. Thanks in advance!




sigs10 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/29/2019 6:22:58 PM)

Cargo Operations needs some development on the editor side. A search and filter feature would be essential adds. Another addition would be packages of historical units such as Marine Expeditionary Unit MEU, much like there are Carrier Battle Group templates.




magi -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (12/30/2019 7:06:28 PM)

I would like to see smaller scaling on the scenario date time stamp and the Chiclets menu items at the top of the screen ......




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/7/2020 4:08:46 PM)

Removed "Tacview - Implement Fog Of War" as this has now been added in B1121.4 . If you voted for this feature you can now vote again.




TheCabal -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/8/2020 9:06:45 AM)

Hey guys... please a little bit more value for TacView -> thx to AAR :) Would be great to see the stuff unfolding in gods eye mode after a scenario ends. Both gods eye and non-gods-eye mode. See how we interpreted threats, misjudged situations... especially reg. sub hunting. The learn factor will increase dramatically.




FIaps -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/9/2020 10:38:55 AM)

AMP and ASP. I hate micromanagement!




Blast33 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/10/2020 10:49:21 AM)

Nice setup this poll
Is it possible to conquer an enemy airfield, with for example an airborne assault, and than use that airfield as your aircraft for other units. (so the airfield has to switch sides).
Is this an idea?




jun5896 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/10/2020 12:31:42 PM)

Now. I pick Full-edit capability into scenario editor. IF can edit a/c loadouts, That will give a good likelihood in the game.





serjames -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/11/2020 3:41:54 PM)

Just another request. Please allow us to 100% control the size of each and every interface UI window. It's so frustrating having to scroll inside windows (e.g. the mission planning window) when I have acres of screen space it could be moved into. Now I know the argument against this is placement or alignment of UI elements in the section below. So lock them. Just allow us to make the units assigned and Unassigned windows as wide as we want please :-)




JPFisher55 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/15/2020 3:06:23 PM)

I suggest that when an aircraft RTB's it does so on full afterburner speed until it reaches bingo fuel and then switches to cruise speed.




JPFisher55 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (1/15/2020 3:08:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris


quote:

ORIGINAL: TalonCG2

Feature request - Logistics and transport of supplies

I love the larger, more complex and longer lasting scenarios. This wouldn't really apply to short duration scenarios, but here goes...

Fuel, either a generic non-specific all use, or broken up into categories of ship/aviation/ground unit. Transported by rail, truck, ship or plane to other "frontline" bases.
Munitions, generic "ammo" that will increase by a fixed amount determined by capacity of the transport and what units call the base their home. Or a more complex and specific transport of individual weapons/ammo.

The generic versions would be easier to implement, but not as realistic, but a good compromise over specific items.

Thoughts?


This is one of the things being worked on.


I would suggest a logistics system similar to the one used by "War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition."




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.199219E-02