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% (137)
AMP - Continuous coverage planner
  1% (7)
Scriptless downed/stranded crew (for CSAR)
  2% (12)
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% (26)
AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff
  3% (18)
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into ScenEdit
  6% (32)
Warning shots
  1% (9)
Scriptless boarding actions
  0% (3)
Integrated speech-to-text (SeaHag-style)
  2% (11)
Tacview - AAR mode
  4% (22)
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 : 475
(last vote on : 10/18/2021 9:44:22 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message


Grazyn -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (4/8/2020 11:25:13 AM)

Edit: already in the list




TitaniumTrout -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (4/21/2020 4:05:40 PM)

In the CMO PE stream today I saw that the cursor data is displayed near the message log. Many times the current info can obscure what you're trying to look at, especially if there's a few units close together.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/VLMJTzq.png[/image]

I'd love to see an option to turn this on in CMO.




Grazyn -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (4/22/2020 11:32:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TitaniumTrout

In the CMO PE stream today I saw that the cursor data is displayed near the message log. Many times the current info can obscure what you're trying to look at, especially if there's a few units close together.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/VLMJTzq.png[/image]

I'd love to see an option to turn this on in CMO.

Game option->map display->map cursor databox visibility->show on bottom




TitaniumTrout -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (4/22/2020 2:37:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn


quote:

ORIGINAL: TitaniumTrout

In the CMO PE stream today I saw that the cursor data is displayed near the message log. Many times the current info can obscure what you're trying to look at, especially if there's a few units close together.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/VLMJTzq.png[/image]

I'd love to see an option to turn this on in CMO.

Game option->map display->map cursor databox visibility->show on bottom


You're a scholar and a gentleman, thanks!




Aaabcwea -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (5/30/2020 4:28:32 PM)

I want to request minor user interface upgrades! There are a lot of small user interface problems that have been around since the launch of Command Modern Operations, for instance the following:

I wish the start screen wasn't full-screen, using the scroll wheel on the time compression button generally does not work, but when clicking on stuff it is generally possible for the "cursor" to get stuck there and when you scroll to zoom on the map all of a sudden you are flicking through an option somewhere, the shortcut buttons should fit in the existing top bar instead of needing their own bar, the bottom bar (which hosts only the group and time step buttons) should also be integrated into the top bar (giving us more vertical space), in the top-right corner there is a 1-pixel misalignment when the shortcut bar is hidden, in full-screen the scroll bar does not align with the right edge of the screen, the message log options are split between "view" and "game" instead of all being in one place, in the right-hand sidebar it is not possible to collapse "unit status", while un-collapsing information there is a temporary text blur, an option to disable images in the database viewer would be nice, the game option "show 'game speed' button on toolbar in main window" appears to do nothing, also sometimes in-game when I point the cursor at a ship an information box with an image and stuff shows up and I have no idea why, and finally, there is the message log: I want options back for 1) a transparent log, 2) raw text by default, and finally, if I set the message log to a separate window I want it to stay a separate window until I close the client.

(Sorry for a wall of text, I will attempt to parse it into a bullet list. My point is I think it is time for a "second pass" of the user interface)




DWReese -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (5/31/2020 10:38:26 AM)

I would like to see better defensive maneuvering (evasive actions) by planes when they are under attack and trying to egress from the area. (Corkscrew of death)




DWReese -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (5/31/2020 10:42:07 AM)

I would like to see units (mostly this applies to ground units) be able to use some form of defensive smoke for concealment, and to interfere with the opposition's ability to see and fire on them (i.e laser, LOS).




Rory Noonan -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/9/2020 3:58:14 AM)

From https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4822905&mpage=1&key=�

quote:

ORIGINAL: rbsj
I like much others love to make our own scenarios and edit (for what is possible) plataforms, more properly, naval plataforms.

Something that could be awesome and I hope not be a overload of work is to give units [FACILITIES and PROPERTIES] as we give units COMMS.

For instance something important to me is using the replenish and refuel a lot to simulate the importance of logistics. But most of the times the Units I want cannot be replenish because it lacks that property. That could be done in the file as we give comms to a unit. For instance give the property REFUEL FROM STARBOARD.

Other thing would be give ships facilities like an Hangar for 2 Medium Aircraft or a Pad. There were some nice ideas during the 80's and 90's of transforming some Destroyers in DDH (Helicopter Destroyer), differently from what is now done by the Japanese Izumo LOL. So if we could simple add a facility like we add a COMM to a unit that could be good.

What could give a little more work is to give aircraft properties like Fly-by-wire or Head Mounted Display. But that would be awesome.




Fido81 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/11/2020 3:28:37 AM)

In light of this interesting article (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/33401/this-is-what-ground-forces-look-like-to-an-electronic-warfare-system-and-why-its-a-big-deal) I would be curious to see how issuing orders that are executed under radio silence changes the operational battlespace.

Would the dev team please consider expanding the already-implemented no comms functionality beyond submarines to enable ships, aircraft, and ground units to operate under either total radio silence, or perhaps even to communicate solely within their group of units or mission? I could see this working really well as a doctrine setting.




alphali -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/17/2020 9:30:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aaabcwea

also sometimes in-game when I point the cursor at a ship an information box with an image and stuff shows up and I have no idea why



If you hold ctrl button and hover a unit a box with unit description will appear.




Simulacra53 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/22/2020 2:48:42 PM)

Better graphics in general.
I rather have high resolution synthetic terrain than mediocre satellite imagery.

There is a lot under the hood and the GUI has been revised, but the map views...
Worse than playing with Google Earth.

[8|]




SheriGoddart -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/23/2020 3:41:53 PM)

How good that you care about multiplayer!




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/23/2020 7:34:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
but the map views...
Worse than playing with Google Earth.
[8|]


...which is kinda like saying "you're a good boxer, but you're worse than Ali in his prime [:D]"

The "mediocre" satellite imagery that you refer to is this: https://s2maps.eu/

...which, to our knowledge, is the best-quality global-scale terrain imagery that can be acquired at a reasonable cost.

If you have some other imagery set in mind, which covers the entire planet landmass, offers better quality & resolution, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg to use commercially, we are all ears [:)]




Simulacra53 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 11:17:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
but the map views...
Worse than playing with Google Earth.
[8|]


...which is kinda like saying "you're a good boxer, but you're worse than Ali in his prime [:D]"

The "mediocre" satellite imagery that you refer to is this: https://s2maps.eu/

...which, to our knowledge, is the best-quality global-scale terrain imagery that can be acquired at a reasonable cost.

If you have some other imagery set in mind, which covers the entire planet landmass, offers better quality & resolution, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg to use commercially, we are all ears [:)]


First let me state that I really appreciate your reaction and it deserves a constructive response.
I have just used the link you have provided with my humble iPad and wifi - looking at the Middle East region with its contrasting terrain - and both the quality and performance are excellent (except for the blown highlights in the desert).

If the visuals and performance in game were the same as or even near to the Sentinel 2 website on my iPad I would be a happy camper.

That said, looks like I am the only one... [:D]




Dimitris -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 11:20:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulacra53
but the map views...
Worse than playing with Google Earth.
[8|]


...which is kinda like saying "you're a good boxer, but you're worse than Ali in his prime [:D]"

The "mediocre" satellite imagery that you refer to is this: https://s2maps.eu/

...which, to our knowledge, is the best-quality global-scale terrain imagery that can be acquired at a reasonable cost.

If you have some other imagery set in mind, which covers the entire planet landmass, offers better quality & resolution, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg to use commercially, we are all ears [:)]


First let me state that I really appreciate your reaction and it deserves a constructive response.
I have just used the link you have provided with my humble iPad and wifi - looking at the Middle East region with its contrasting terrain - and both the quality and performance are excellent (except for the blown highlights in the desert).

If the visuals and performance in game were the same as or even near to the Sentinel 2 website on my iPad I would be a happy camper.

That said, looks like I am the only one... [:D]


It's the same map source (strictly speaking the dataset they are using is the 2018 version while we are currently using the 2016 one). Perhaps the high-detail map tiles are slow to load on your system for whatever reason.

Any comparison between our map system and those from Google, Microsoft etc. must necessarily be prefaced with the caveat that you are comparing us against literally trillion-dollar companies [:D]




Simulacra53 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 11:49:43 AM)

Sentinel 2019
[image]https://rhorta.home.xs4all.nl/TEMP/MATRIX/Sentinel_2019.jpg[/image]

Sentinel 2018
[image]https://rhorta.home.xs4all.nl/TEMP/MATRIX/Sentinel_2018.jpg[/image]

CMO
[image]https://rhorta.home.xs4all.nl/TEMP/MATRIX/CMO.jpg[/image]

CMO closer zoom (not max) - resolution stays same
[image]https://rhorta.home.xs4all.nl/TEMP/MATRIX/CMO_zoom1.jpg[/image]

Maybe it is time to move to the 2019 data?




Simulacra53 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 11:52:16 AM)

The system is a 9700K, with RTX 2080, 32GB and CMO is on a SSD.
Could be connection - but iPad to site does not seem that affected.

This is sort of OT, so I can understand if you want to take this out of the thread.

EDIT screenshots were taken on same desktop as game install.




Kushan04 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 4:21:50 PM)

This should be under Tech Support forum rather then here in the feature request thread.




Simulacra53 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/24/2020 5:20:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kushan04

This should be under Tech Support forum rather then here in the feature request thread.


I donít need tech support.

If anything the feature would be to update CMO with Sentinal 2019 data.




BeirutDude -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/25/2020 12:41:12 PM)

Two issues I would love to see, the first i think is vital as I just had a computer crash and lost an hour's worth of Scenario Editing work...

1. Autosave for Scenario Editing. Maybe once every minute to five minutes. Seems like it doesn't need to be as frequent as game play autosave, but if you can save a game every 10 seconds, this should be pretty easy.

2. A "Go To Location" option were you add a Lat/Long and the game goes to that location. Sorry but at 60 those numbers on the bottom are hard to use. If I need to go to 30.5, -81.5 i should just have to type in in and got there. So if it's there and I missed someone please tell me, but that would be EXTREMELY useful!




cdnice -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (6/25/2020 3:38:57 PM)

A feature under "Nice to have" since there are ways around it, would be for waterways to always have a minimum depth. As a Canadian example I cannot sail a frigate down to Quebec City let alone the Great Lakes due to the depths issue. I understand that this is due to the altitude and depths being based on sea level, it would be nice if that could be corrected at some point.

A work around pointed out to me that has worked, in case others are not aware, is a series of small ports placed along the shorelines to make the water navigable. An ability to change the cone on the ports to make the radius of the area affected smaller would also be helpful as an improvement for the above mentioned work around.

Thanks for all you guys do!




Battelman2 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (7/6/2020 5:50:05 AM)

Another QoL feature would be the ability to define mission patrol/prosecution areas as a radius around a particular unit, instead of using reference points. For example, I want to create a CAP around my CVBG with a patrol area of 50nm and prosecution area of 250nm. Currently, the only way to do this is by creating a circular pattern of reference points relative to the CVBG. Having this capability built into the missions editor UI would be killer.




DracheTek -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (7/6/2020 9:05:12 AM)

I would like to have a feature that allow aircrafts (or at least those equipped with RWR, but it can technically be done by receiving intel from ELINT units in real life) be aware of and keep distance to certain sensor (namely search radars of some well known missile systems). This can come along with doctrine setting like WRA (A list of enemy sensors are provided, we can choose default distance/manual override distance/ ignore).




hzarr6901 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (7/25/2020 7:10:23 PM)

enable borders/coastlines at close in zoom




Zahar00 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/11/2020 9:13:53 PM)

[&o]
1. settings/ range symbols- It would be nice if the default option was not "all units" but the option selected by the player
2. time acceleration - should work as in the previous version of the game. In that version, all you had to do was move your mouse over the appropriate acceleration. Very useful. This way it also allowed you to quickly slow down time to one second without holding hands on the keyboard.
3. Formation Editor- some kind of grid would be useful to help you set up other ships in relation to the leader. Best with a visible group course.






orca -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/12/2020 2:20:43 AM)


Iím not sure the programming feasibility but it would be nice to be able to have an option for a computer generated formation based on user set inputs such as expected primary threat vector direction, dispersed vs concentrated formation, and primary ship mission (ie asw or aaw escort, central formation ship, ...). This would especially be useful for computer controlled sides. Specifically after some of the ships in the formation are destroyed leaving the rest of the ships which remain in the original formation positions resulting in a very unbalanced formation.




ronmexico111 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/12/2020 8:20:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zahar00

[&o]
1. settings/ range symbols- It would be nice if the default option was not "all units" but the option selected by the player
2. time acceleration - should work as in the previous version of the game. In that version, all you had to do was move your mouse over the appropriate acceleration. Very useful. This way it also allowed you to quickly slow down time to one second without holding hands on the keyboard.
3. Formation Editor- some kind of grid would be useful to help you set up other ships in relation to the leader. Best with a visible group course.





For #1 I think you can already do this by saving a personal map profile. As for #3, that isn't like the formation editor in Harpoon is it?




Zahar00 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/13/2020 2:32:51 PM)

quote:



For #1 I think you can already do this by saving a personal map profile. As for #3, that isn't like the formation editor in Harpoon is it?



Yeah, it's about some kind of tool to make it easier for you to get your ships in line.
And thanks, I didn't know I could save a personal map profile.




ronmexico111 -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/13/2020 5:02:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zahar00

quote:



For #1 I think you can already do this by saving a personal map profile. As for #3, that isn't like the formation editor in Harpoon is it?



Yeah, it's about some kind of tool to make it easier for you to get your ships in line.
And thanks, I didn't know I could save a personal map profile.


Oh, ok. I usually pause the game, use the range/bearing tool to find where I'd like to place a ship relative to another one and then set down a reference point. Once I've got those plotted then it's simple for me to just place the ships in the formation editor and unpause the game. I actually never really liked the formation editor in all the years I played Harpoon. I could never quite get my ships and aircraft in the optimal formation I would've liked, simply because the different zones in the different range rings had different behaviors so it always came down to making some weird compromises and having to change the distances on the rings to get things to work properly. CMANO and CMO is a lot easier for me in these respects.




gsalvar -> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests (8/13/2020 7:44:18 PM)

Hi,
Is it still open?.
I can not see the radio button to vote.
thx




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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