Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: orca
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues Page: <<   < prev  157 158 [159] 160 161   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 12:30:45 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The Mi-2 helicopter (currently included in the Cold War database) is missing in DB3000. Its service life ended in the 1980s-1990s for most of the Eastern block (some major historical examples would be the East Germany and Poland), but some nations still retain them in service today, most prominently North Korea.

Source: Wikipedia for the MI-2 and the SIPRI Arms Transfers Database.

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4741
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 12:58:35 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The PLAAF 737's are also missing from the database. Similarly to the TU-154M Careless that were converted for ELINT duties, China also operates 14 737's in an ELINT/VIP transport role. The aircraft were originally purchased legally for Chinese airlines, but in 2007 (possible much earlier than this) it was reported that these aircraft had been illegally requisitioned by the PLAAF and converted into ELINT and airborne command aircraft for commanders. Currently there are eight 737-300s, two 737-700s, and four 737-800s in service.

Source: Wikipedia article for List of active People's Liberation Army aircraft (see citation one), the Wikipedia article for the 737, the planespotters dot net page on the PLAAF, and the XaierForces article on the PLAAF.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/27/2019 1:00:22 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4742
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 1:08:32 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The civilian Boeing 737 MAX family of aircraft are currently missing from the database. It entered service with its first airline in 2017 and is the newest line of the 737.

Source: Wikipedia article for the 737 MAX.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/27/2019 1:09:31 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4743
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 1:52:31 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The Boeing 720 is also missing from both the Cold War database and DB3000. It was a derivative of the 707 that was in commercial service from 1960 until 2010. Two versions were produced, the baseline 720 with Pratt & Whitney JT3C turbojet engines and the 720B in 1961 with Pratt & Whitney JT3D turbofans.

Source: Wikipedia for the Boeing 720.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/27/2019 1:55:29 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4744
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 3:19:11 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The 9M337 Sosna-R (SA-24) SAM system is a Russian SAM system that entered service in 2019 as a replacement for the Strela 10M. It holds 12 ready to fire laser/radio guided missiles that can be reloaded in 12 minutes. The missile has a maximum range of 10 km, flies at 900 meters per second, and its payload is made up of two warheads (a fragmented-rod warhead for proximity detonation and an AP-Frag warhead for impact detonation) weighing a total of 7 kg. The Sosna’s self-contained optical sensor allows it to track 50 targets and engage one on the move. The Sosna weapons system is based to the hull of a MT-LB which gives it a top speed of 62 km/h and a range of 500 km.

Source: Wikipedia article for the Sosna and the army recognition dot com article on the Sosna.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4745
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 3:41:57 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
N/A

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/27/2019 9:56:40 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4746
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 7:55:06 PM   
ProdigyofMilitaryPride

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/17/2015
Status: offline
For DB3000, this here if you don't mind...

Source
https://www.helis.com/database/news/mi-17_mexico/




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The courageous must protect freedom." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Anything built by human hands can be destroyed. This is no exception." - Kei "Edge" Nagase, Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4747
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 9:45:45 PM   
apache85

 

Posts: 2001
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Another missing facility is the French Pluton theater ballistic missile. Seventy were deployed and it was in service from 1974 to 1993 and was launched off of a TEL on an AMX-30 tank chassis than gave it a top speed of 60 km/h with a 600km range. The missile weighed 2,423 kg and had a minimum range of 17km and a maximum range of 120km, with a CEP of 150m. It used inertial guidance and flew at 1100 meters per second with either a 15 kt nuclear warhead, a 25 kt nuclear warhead, or a conventional 500 kg HE warhead. It was often apart of divisions escorted by the AMX-10P IFV and supported in the field by the R20 combat reconnaissance drone (which is also missing from the database.)

Source: Military Today article on the Pluton.





Have you actually looked at the latest database?


_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4748
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 9:49:05 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
yeah, I looked up Pluton and didn't find it in the DB3000 database

(in reply to apache85)
Post #: 4749
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 9:56:16 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Oh, I didn't know they released a new database on here on the 13th. I've been using the Steam version and I thought that would update when something new came out.

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4750
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 10:39:29 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The AMX-10P is missing from the French Army. It was in service from 1973 until 2015, undergoing some up armored modernization improvements from 2006-2008. Other major variants include the AMX-10/HOT (had two ready to fire HOT missile launchers with an additional 20 stored inside) and AMX-10/Milan (with two MILAN ATGM launchers and 10 additional missiles stored on the inside.)

Source: Wikipedia, Military Today, and Tank Encyclopedia articles for the AMX-10P.

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/27/2019 10:53:09 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4751
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 11:27:09 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 424
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
Hellos

Came across interesting out of service dates. These most important so BDukes and other dope don't put in scenareos.

Look like last Flight one Los Angeles Bremerton decommissions this year. So Los Angelese #555 given 2019 Outs.

http://seawaves.com/developments/ship-decommissionings/

Looking at Wikipedia list seems more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Los_Angeles-class_submarines

Look like 2019 out date for Dallas version #557. Buffalo last boat and outs in January this year.

So all Flight I versions outs by this year-2019.

Thanks!





(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4752
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 11:30:48 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 424
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Another weapons system that's missing are the ballistic missile variants of the Chinese B-611. It has a range of 150km to 450km depending on the variant and was first publicly shown in 2004 with a newer variant being first shown in 2006. The variants include the baseline B611 with a 500kg warhead, the B611M with a 480 kg warhead and a range between 80 and 260km, and the B611MR an ARM semi-ballistic missile first shown in 2014 that uses inertial GPS guidance and a wideband passive radar.

Source: Wikipedia article for the B-611, see citation #1 for more detailed information.





This already in databases. Look in china facility for SY-400. #1679. Turks version there too.

This make you happy? It does me

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4753
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 11:50:17 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
No, the SY-400 is a different variant of the B611. It has entirely different ranges and limited capability.

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4754
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 11:51:36 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The variants I specified are missing from the database and are entirely different weapons systems than the SY400.

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4755
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/27/2019 11:55:41 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 424
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
Italy ship out of service dates

Ok All Italian Minerva Frigates (#1134) gone by 2018.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerva-class_corvette
Second source here
http://seawaves.com/developments/ship-decommissionings/

Italian Artigliere/Iraqi Lupo retires all by 2018
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupo-class_frigate
http://seawaves.com/developments/ship-decommissionings/

Thanks!


(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4756
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/28/2019 1:49:25 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
The T-55M/T-55AM are missing from the database. It was a 1983 modernization of the T-55/T-55A by the Soviet Union, widely exported (main export users were Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary). It boasted improved armor, the ability to fire the 9K116-1 "Bastion" ATGM (even while on the move), and improved gun stabilization systems and sights (the exact system varies between each country, but the main ones were the Russian "Tsiklon-M1" gun stabilization system and TShSM-32PV sights and the Czech Klavido FCS.) They were in service in most countries until the early 2000s.

Source: Wikipedia and Global Security dot com articles for the T-55.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/28/2019 1:50:27 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4757
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/28/2019 6:28:33 PM   
apache85

 

Posts: 2001
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Hey guys just a friendly reminder that this thread is for requests for platforms that are going to be used in community scenarios, and meaningful corrections to existing platforms. Unfortunately it's not practical for us to dedicate dev time to including sundry platforms simply because they exist(ed).

Also a reminder that references should be somewhat more detailed than a mention of Wikipedia. Include at least a link to the relevant page, please.

And finally, please check the most current version of the DB3k before posting an update request.

_____________________________


(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4758
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/28/2019 6:50:22 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Unfortunately I'm not allowed to post links yet, it hasn't been 11 days from my seventh post so I can only write out the website titles. And personally when I just link the Wikipedia article that's usually because it's either the only place where any detailed information is available or it already has the most relevant citations at the bottom of the indicated article(s). Although as you can see where applicable I use more than one source. And the Pluton was the only vehicle where I had that issue, every other issue I've posted here still hasn't been added in/fixed. And on the importance of the vehicles I've recommended, I'd say all of the combat vehicle's I've pointed out to include have been/are either: current mass produced combat vehicles for the nations they're apart of or important historical/future vehicles for said nation (in the sense that they were/will be mass produced.)

(in reply to apache85)
Post #: 4759
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/28/2019 8:08:01 PM   
TwarVG

 

Posts: 32
Joined: 3/26/2018
From: Britannia
Status: offline
Tookatee, I can't imagine a random assortment of AFVs and airliners are of paramount importance in a game whose main focus is air and naval combat. In a perfect world, the database would contain entries for every asset you could think of but that's just not realistic. Next time you're thinking of submitting a request, maybe ask yourself how important that asset is to the game and if it would really be worth the effort to include it. As Apache85 said, it's not practical to spend time adding something to the database merely because it existed. Plus if you really want something included, add as many sources as you can and you've got a better shot. At least once a day I'll flick through the forum to look at the new posts and I'm slightly impressed with how many posts you've been making and how passionate you seem to be about getting the finer details right, keep it up my friend!

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4760
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/28/2019 10:00:06 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
Requesting the RQ-3A DarkStar UAV for a scenario I'm working on

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_RQ-3_DarkStar
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app2/q-3.html
https://fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

Hypothetical Unit, United States, Stealth Aircraft
1998-?




Length: 4.57 m (15 ft 0 in)
Wingspan: 21.03 m (69 ft 0 in)
Height: 1.52 m (5 ft 0 in)
Weight: max: 3900 kg (8600 lb)
Speed: > 460 km/h (285 mph)
Ceiling: 19800 m (65000 ft) (Some sources say 65k ft, other say 45k ft)
Endurance: 12 h (some sources say 8 h)
Propulsion: Williams F129 turbofan; 8.45 kN (1900 lb)


Sensors:
Northrop Grumman AN/ZPQ-1 TESAR (Tactical Endurance Synthetic Aperture Radar) surveillance radar or a Recon/Optical CA-236 electro-optical camera system. (1 loadout for each?)



< Message edited by Excroat3 -- 6/28/2019 10:02:01 PM >

(in reply to TwarVG)
Post #: 4761
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/29/2019 2:08:15 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Well as I said in the previous post of mine, most of the combat vehicles I've mentioned were/are the MAIN combat vehicles for whatever nation I specified. I haven't simply been looking through the database for every little thing that's missing, I've been playing/improving existing scenarios and been looking through what I can add to make them more realistic/detailed. One prominent example would be the South Korean/American vehicles I've posted here. I've been playing a fair bit of North vs South Korean scenarios and found that there are a good bit of assets missing from the South side and came here to post about them. Same thing goes for the various Warsaw Pact vehicles I've posted here, I've been playing a fair few East vs West scenarios and found that these frontline country's forces that NATO would've initially fought before the Soviets could airlift in the bulk of their forces are missing.

Even items like the two commercial aircraft I posted about hold some importance because they can be used in creating realistic military scenarios quite well, items like the Boeing 737 and 720 were at their times prominent civilian airliners that would clog international skyways in times of conflict (and can even from a distance be mistaken for actual military assets such as tankers/AWACS aircraft or ASW aircraft like the P-8.)

And I fully expect for there to be some sort of priority list of stuff the dev team has to work on, and while I don't expect any of my recommendations to be prioritized over anything else currently on the docket I do believe that they all have a purpose in the game and that their inclusion would add meaningful detail to many scenarios the community has already published (and in some cases create the catalyst for scenarios with the countries that are missing their current armor/any armor in their entirety) otherwise I wouldn't have taken the time out of my day to even post about them.

(in reply to TwarVG)
Post #: 4762
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 11:03:23 AM   
SakiNoE

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

most of the combat vehicles I've mentioned were/are the MAIN combat vehicles for whatever nation I specified. I haven't simply been looking through the database for every little thing that's missing, I've been playing/improving existing scenarios and been looking through what I can add to make them more realistic/detailed.


Except that, even assuming your AFV requests were added [minus some exceptions] it would not make any scenario any more realistic or detailed. This is due to the fact that, as currently modeled, ground combat is incredibly simplistic; adding more markers that will have relatively similar performance to all the other markers will not change this. Detailed is not always good, in fact if done poorly detailed simply means lower performance due to added AU for no reason.

quote:

Even items like the two commercial aircraft I posted about hold some importance because they can be used in creating realistic military scenarios quite well, items like the Boeing 737 and 720 were at their times prominent civilian airliners that would clog international skyways in times of conflict (and can even from a distance be mistaken for actual military assets such as tankers/AWACS aircraft or ASW aircraft like the P-8.)


This ignores how players think. If we take a quick look at the 737-900ER in the DB we'll find their cruising speed is ~440 knots at 38K ft. If we look at a scenario that uses civilian air traffic [in this case, Seven Days in October] we'll find that it uses cyclical ferry missions with the civilian aircraft at cruise and unspecified altitude in order to represent normal flights. If we put the 737 in the same position, it is incredibly easy to distinguish from a military aircraft; it's at 38K feet and 440 knots. The mission AI's altitudes and speed are dictated by loadout, and, as far as I know, there is no loadout in the game that will make planes fly at that speed and altitude, making such a civilian flight easily distinguishable from military aircraft. You could of course go and manually set up each mission to have them "mirror" an AWACS flight pattern, but at that point you have another problem; AWACS emit, and MPAs do by default. Last I checked a Boeing 720 does not carry a massive search radar. Furthermore, AWACS and MPAs don't fly easily recognisable flights between airports for no apparently reason, tankers do fly set routes, but it's between in-air way points, not between random airports. So no, adding a bunch of assorted commercial aircraft will not in fact do much; commercial air traffic in CMANO is window-dressing, nice window-dressing, but still window-dressing.

SakiNoE

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4763
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 12:28:57 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
I'd like to know what you think some of the exceptions are, cause so far most if not all of the AFV's that I've posted about here have some sort of unique function to them that gives them a purpose to be used (even in CMANO's relatively simplistic [but yet still broadly accurate and fun] armored combat.) And you're also taking great leaps of faith in regards to how the community would use that assets. They don't all have to be used in one MASSIVE CPU chugging scenario (although I do believe that some of the customers with the Academic/Military license for CMANO would more than be willing and able to do so for their own purposes.)

And on the point of airliners the two I recommended were an anomaly in the whole of the issues I brought up (I was reading up on the recent stuff with the 737-MAX and happened to also not see the 720 when scrolling past all the 707s in the list), and they would serve the exact same purpose that all the other commercial aircraft that are in the game serve. And remember that CMANO isn't just a game, it's also a tool that academic circles and some militaries use to help evaluate any potential scenario (and while those licenses do give them some ability to modify/add units themselves I don't think it would hurt for such units to come already as apart of the base product and save them a bit of work.)

(in reply to SakiNoE)
Post #: 4764
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 2:28:57 PM   
SakiNoE

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

I'd like to know what you think some of the exceptions are, cause so far most if not all of the AFV's that I've posted about here have some sort of unique function to them that gives them a purpose to be used


No, they're not. Several of the requests you have made are either clones of units that already exist in the game [Spanish B1 Centauro, Post 4666, Polish Leopards, Post 4667, Polish BWP-1s, Post 4668]. Since many AFVs in this game use generic sensors, and share weapons, it's entirely possible to use say, German Leopard 2A4s as stand-ins for Spanish Leopard 2A4s. That's not a unique purpose, all it does is put the same unit under a different nation in the DB, which is not strictly necessary for scenario building. Furthermore, some units could feasibly be made with the editor. For example, the Polish Spike-LR humvees could be made by taking the German Pumas and removing non-applicable weapons. Since all AFVs have "General Armour: None", from the generic ammo trucks to the M1A2 and T-90, there's no survivability difference and since, iirc, all AFVs can reach the same top speed there won't be a major difference in maneuverability either.

quote:

And you're also taking great leaps of faith in regards to how the community would use that assets. They don't all have to be used in one MASSIVE CPU chugging scenario


When exactly did I say that all requested units would be only used in massive scenarios? What I stated was that this seems to be requesting unnecessary amounts of detail, and in scenarios unnecessary amounts of detail translates to high AU. You've played Red Dragon Descends, it's incredibly well-modeled, but runs like a sail ship against the wind; really slowly. For more examples, look at Desert Storm v1.2 or Northern Fury 12.6 The Longest Battle. Do I think all of the requested units will be used in that style of scenario? No, I do not, but I am stating that detail that may not always be necessary can reduce playability.

quote:

they would serve the exact same purpose that all the other commercial aircraft that are in the game serve.


In other words, they would be superfluous.

SakiNoE


< Message edited by SakiNoE -- 6/30/2019 2:41:21 PM >

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4765
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 3:02:49 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
quote:

Since all AFVs have "General Armour: None", from the generic ammo trucks to the M1A2 and T-90, there's no survivability difference and since, iirc, all AFVs can reach the same top speed there won't be a major difference in maneuverability either.


You understand that it's set like that because academic and military customers can adjust those values to match real world specifications, most of which like the armor is highly classified or specific to each unit (so rather than give most likely wrong approximations that would need to be adjusted by the customer anyways I assume CMANO just decided to leave that value as the same for all units.)

quote:

What I stated was that this seems to be requesting unnecessary amounts of detail, and in scenarios unnecessary amounts of detail translates to high AU... Do I think all of the requested units will be used in that style of scenario? No, I do not, but I am stating that detail that may not always be necessary can reduce playability.


With that kind of logic CMANO would have half the armor it has now and only from about maybe 10 different nations. The addition of these units wouldn't take away from anything, but only give additional units for people/commercial entities/militaries to work with and create their own scenarios. The issue on playability rests solely on the scenario creator, CMANO's job as a tool is to offer a stable and diverse platform for which the authors can use to create any scenario they like.

quote:

When exactly did I say that all requested units would be only used in massive scenarios?


You said that when you indicated that the units addition would cause performance issues, as the only way that would occur is in massive scenarios involving those vehicles (which are once again irrelevant to customers such as governments or academic organizations who most likely run CMANO on supercomputers or at least high performance setups.)

quote:

In other words, they would be superfluous.


All that statement shows is a lack of understanding for the purpose for any of the commercial aircraft in the game and a blatant insult to the work the CMANO devs put into adding each one of them in.



< Message edited by Tookatee -- 6/30/2019 3:22:33 PM >

(in reply to SakiNoE)
Post #: 4766
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 3:48:07 PM   
SakiNoE

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

You understand that it's set like that because academic and military customers can adjust those values to match real world specifications, most of which like the armor is highly classified or specific to each unit (so rather than give most likely wrong approximations that would need to be adjusted by the customer anyways I assume CMANO just decided to leave that value as the same for all units.)


You understand it wasn't a criticism? It was literally just a statement of fact in relation to what I was saying about how units could be changed in the editor to suit different needs, but cut that out and reduce arguments to strawmen. I really love that you refuse to even acknowledge the fact my proposed solution exists,

quote:

The addition of these units wouldn't take away from anything, but only give additional units for people/commercial entities/militaries to work with and create their own scenarios.


I agree that the addition of units doesn't take away from anything, but these requests are. Rory doesn't come in and give "reminders" for no reason, it shows that the devs feel the system is being clogged up. Now, I doubt you are the sole source of that, but you have certainly posted in a voluminous fashion in this thread recently.

quote:

All that statement shows is a lack of understanding for the purpose for any of the commercial aircraft in the game and a blatant insult to the work the CMANO devs put into adding each one of them in.


Except you haven't explained what the proposed purpose would be. Initially it was "the Boeing 737 and 720 were at their times prominent civilian airliners that would clog international skyways in times of conflict (and can even from a distance be mistaken for actual military assets such as tankers/AWACS aircraft or ASW aircraft like the P-8.)". I refuted this by explaining how no, it's near impossible to fool players into making them be mistaken. You didn't actually argue against that, just stating that "they would serve the exact same purpose that all the other commercial aircraft that are in the game serve". Since you did not state any new purpose I presumed the purpose you mentioned to be exactly the same one I had rebutted against earlier.

quote:

You said that when you indicated that the units addition would cause performance issues, as the only way that would occur is in massive scenarios involving those vehicles (which are once again irrelevant to customers such as governments or academic organizations who most likely run CMANO on supercomputers or at least high performance setups.)


Read what I said. I said that excessive detail causes slowdowns, and that the ability to add a bunch of new markers with relatively similar performance to a scenario for the sake of realism is pretty unnecessary. Furthermore, who cares what a Pro customer wants? I didn't pay money for the game to make requests for needs that I don't know. I believe that the vast majority of players, in terms of number, probably not buying power, are not playing this game on "supercomputers or at least high performance setups". Why don't they matter? Why are Pro customers, in what appears to be your view, the only ones that are relevant?

quote:

With that kind of logic CMANO would have half the armor it has now and only from about maybe 10 different nations.


And, pray tell, would it be so so much worse for that? If you buy CMANO for the DB, I understand that it'd be worse for those who bought it for the DB, but for those who bought it because of the mechanical aspects of the sim? No, it would not be worse.

SakiNoE

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4767
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 4:14:02 PM   
Tookatee

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 6/11/2019
Status: offline
Look I don't understand what's your vendetta against more options, but this discussion is clogging up this thread with irrelevant tangents rather than bugs/issues for the database.

Now, I'm going to restate my point again since you seem to not grasp it in it's entirety, these units I've specified take away from nothing by including them, there is no downsides for them being in the game, I understand the devs must prioritize what they work on and are completely free to do so as this is their software (I've been under the impression that this thread was for such recommendations and have received confirmation from another dev that these were "in the bucket" so to say for consideration to be worked on), but there are only so many military vehicles/weapons in existence and it makes little sense in my eyes to completely exclude the possibility of these items being included as you seem to be suggesting (especially as most of them would either bring armored vehicles to a nation that currently has none, or bring a nation's forces up to date in the database.)

Additionally, you are once again not realizing what I'm trying to say about your comment on unit performance. These units could ALSO be used in THEIR OWN SCENARIOS, independent of other broad reaching scenarios like a East vs West or North V South scenario. You however seem fixated on the performance impact of a scenario author (not CMANO) incorporating these units into one massive scenario, simply adding them to the database will do absolutely nothing to performance.

If you wish to respond further to this please edit your last comment to reflect your response rather than post a new comment as that would continue to flood this thread with more irrelevant posts. I will of course do the same to this comment in regards to this conversation, if you wish to continue it.

(in reply to SakiNoE)
Post #: 4768
RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? - 6/30/2019 5:43:21 PM   
duelok11

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/21/2018
Status: offline
I would like to request for the addition of the Philippine navy aw 109 and lynx Wildcat helicopter to the db and also the brp tarlac which comes from the melkavar class lcs of Indonesian navy. Thanks!

Links:

https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/tarlac-class-strategic-sealift-vessels/
https://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsphilippine-navy-receives-three-agustawestland-aw109-power-helicopters-4144806/?fbclid=IwAR2LLOUWadko6WR-flF0TdSHrFgV9TFBoZDNpTZKbRRsMP8ln6AGe4apjNQ
https://www.janes.com/article/88356/philippines-receive-lynx-wildcats

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 4769
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 6/30/2019 5:53:47 PM   
leonardus68

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 12/19/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tookatee

Well as I said in the previous post of mine, most of the combat vehicles I've mentioned were/are the MAIN combat vehicles for whatever nation I specified. I haven't simply been looking through the database for every little thing that's missing, I've been playing/improving existing scenarios and been looking through what I can add to make them more realistic/detailed. One prominent example would be the South Korean/American vehicles I've posted here. I've been playing a fair bit of North vs South Korean scenarios and found that there are a good bit of assets missing from the South side and came here to post about them. Same thing goes for the various Warsaw Pact vehicles I've posted here, I've been playing a fair few East vs West scenarios and found that these frontline country's forces that NATO would've initially fought before the Soviets could airlift in the bulk of their forces are missing.

Even items like the two commercial aircraft I posted about hold some importance because they can be used in creating realistic military scenarios quite well, items like the Boeing 737 and 720 were at their times prominent civilian airliners that would clog international skyways in times of conflict (and can even from a distance be mistaken for actual military assets such as tankers/AWACS aircraft or ASW aircraft like the P-8.)

And I fully expect for there to be some sort of priority list of stuff the dev team has to work on, and while I don't expect any of my recommendations to be prioritized over anything else currently on the docket I do believe that they all have a purpose in the game and that their inclusion would add meaningful detail to many scenarios the community has already published (and in some cases create the catalyst for scenarios with the countries that are missing their current armor/any armor in their entirety) otherwise I wouldn't have taken the time out of my day to even post about them.

You're right. Absolutely agreed here.

(in reply to Tookatee)
Post #: 4770
Page:   <<   < prev  157 158 [159] 160 161   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues Page: <<   < prev  157 158 [159] 160 161   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.373