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: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
[Poll]

RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]


Downed pilots / CSAR (without using the EE)
  13% (70)
Improve weather modelling (local fronts etc.)
  12% (64)
Dedicated sensor page on DB viewer
  3% (20)
Intermittent sensor settings
  5% (28)
TOT planner/Advance Strike Planner
  29% (147)
Display weapon firing arcs in DB viewer
  1% (7)
Custom draw on map
  3% (16)
Additional contact info for passive sonar contacts
  1% (6)
Ability to group ref points
  0% (2)
Ability to name grouped ref points
  1% (6)
Sprint and drift while on mission
  1% (6)
Order weapons with active datalinks to self destruct
  0% (1)
1/3rd rule option for strike missions
  0% (1)
Multiple map windows
  2% (12)
WEGO MP
  4% (24)
Real-time MP
  8% (43)
Mid-flight mechanical breakdowns on aircraft
  0% (1)
Expand space ops (Shuttle / Skylab, armed sats etc.)
  1% (7)
Sunrise/sunset/nautical twilight calculator
  0% (1)
Option to enable a message when a vehicle reaches a specific waypoint
  0% (3)
Ability to change color of grouped refpoints and shaded patrol areas
  0% (2)
Aircraft Maintenence and Support Crew Modeling
  1% (8)
Player's Alarm Clock
  0% (0)
Collateral Damage Zone (CDZ)
  0% (1)
Unit proficiency affects adherence to ToT
  0% (0)
Optional "Beginner" GUI
  1% (6)
Make sonobuys and refpoints unselectable when invisible
  0% (0)
Ability to deactivate (destruct) sonobuoys
  0% (0)
Use "Areas" or "Routes" to simplify refpoint management
  0% (2)
Display unit thumbnail image right next to unit icon
  0% (0)
Customizeable soundslot per unit-type (hear a sound when select a unit
  0% (0)
Display time at current rate to charge SSK batteries to full
  0% (0)
Lag in obtaining info from non-realtime intel/recon assets
  0% (3)
Hotkey to change sonobuoy visibility
  0% (0)
Attack a Reference Point
  0% (4)
Show unit weapons list (nominal) for identified contacts
  0% (0)
Reverse targeting vectors (show who is targeting selected contact)
  0% (3)
Helo in-flight refuelling (from ships)
  0% (3)
Apply the 1/3 rule to Ferry Flight missions
  0% (1)
Extra filter on DB-viewer for platform sub-type
  0% (0)
Refuel Option: Set amount of fuel to take on
  0% (3)
Ability to resize icons so big icons in small countries don't overlap.
  0% (0)
Message Log option to hide messages that break fog of war.
  0% (0)
Hover (RAST) refueling for helicopters
  0% (1)
Filtering and search added to add cargo dialog
  0% (0)
Ship Towing
  0% (3)


Total Votes : 505


(last vote on : 10/22/2020 6:45:29 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/17/2014 10:36:05 AM   
CV60


Posts: 833
Joined: 10/1/2012
Status: offline
In addition to better weather modeling, could the game include a small sunrise/sunset/nautical twilight calculator? This would be very helpful, especially for the cold war scenarios. I know such calculators are on-line, but having one in the game would help for strike planning.

(in reply to lowchi)
Post #: 271
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/26/2014 8:46:16 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
I'd like to see adjustment of engagement ranges.

Let's consider CAP fighters engaging incoming aircraft. Once enemy closes in, at some point fighters will fire AAMs, normally two per target. This happens at some "default" range. Now missiles PH drops with range, sometimes radically. If the incoming aircraft are fighters, that's OK. If it is the bombers that are incoming, which cannot shoot back, I would like to engage at much shorter ranges, so as not to loose PH. So I would like an option like "adjust engagement range" and then, like "Default", "3/4 default" and "1/2 default". Harpoon CE I recall had this for SAMs. This might be a doctrine setting, so it can be applied at all levels from side-wide down to individual units. Effectively, I'm looking for a setting to balance between maintaining maximum standoff and achieving maximum kills per weapon fired.

(in reply to deepdive)
Post #: 272
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/26/2014 11:19:10 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
Removed "More variable cloud cover" as this has been available for a while now.

_____________________________


(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 273
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/26/2014 11:20:21 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
Removed "Ordnance transfer to bases" as this has been available since at least v1.05.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 274
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/22/2014 6:06:48 PM   
hellfish6


Posts: 835
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline
I'd like to ask for a "recon" mission, which is essentially a patrol, but prevents your recon units from engaging enemy forces. I ask because I have an allied unit providing recon support for my side, but I had to put it on an ASW patrol mission inside Germany because the recon planes were making gun runs on targets and going Winchester when all I wanted them to do was provide target detection/assessments for my strike force. It's a crude workaround, and doesn't allow those recon units to adequately investigate the contacts they discover (unless, of course, I plop a submarine in the Rhine).

_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 275
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/22/2014 6:22:12 PM   
Grondoval

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 11/2/2014
From: Niedersachsen, GER
Status: offline
I would like to make a suggestion:

How about the option to enable a message when a vehicle reaches a specific waypoint (in the waypoint menu you could select IF you want to be notified and in the game menu you could select HOW you want to be notified - per message log or time-stop-pop-up). You could plot some complicated ingress route for a strike and enable the pop up message for the last waypoint before target and dont miss out details of the strike.

Something that says (Unit XY or Group XY has reached Waypoint XY)

< Message edited by Grondoval -- 12/22/2014 7:24:54 PM >

(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 276
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/22/2014 7:00:24 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
I'd like to ask for a "recon" mission, which is essentially a patrol, but prevents your recon units from engaging enemy forces. I ask because I have an allied unit providing recon support for my side, but I had to put it on an ASW patrol mission inside Germany because the recon planes were making gun runs on targets and going Winchester when all I wanted them to do was provide target detection/assessments for my strike force. It's a crude workaround, and doesn't allow those recon units to adequately investigate the contacts they discover (unless, of course, I plop a submarine in the Rhine).


Isn't this possible with a patrol mission with weapons-tight?

_____________________________


(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 277
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/22/2014 7:06:48 PM   
hellfish6


Posts: 835
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
I'd like to ask for a "recon" mission, which is essentially a patrol, but prevents your recon units from engaging enemy forces. I ask because I have an allied unit providing recon support for my side, but I had to put it on an ASW patrol mission inside Germany because the recon planes were making gun runs on targets and going Winchester when all I wanted them to do was provide target detection/assessments for my strike force. It's a crude workaround, and doesn't allow those recon units to adequately investigate the contacts they discover (unless, of course, I plop a submarine in the Rhine).


Isn't this possible with a patrol mission with weapons-tight?


Can that be done on an AI-controlled side with most of the aircraft still at base?

_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 278
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 2:34:36 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5201
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
I would think a support mission on a single loop of an area would work. Keep opportunity fire off for the mission. At worst, use Lua to keep weapons tight, but I don't think you have to. Lua gives you a lot of flexibility to manage those missions for the AI, but even without it I would think it would work.

(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 279
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 6:13:59 AM   
Tomcat84

 

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
I agree. A support mission or maybe even a patrol mission with Weapons Hold/Tight (e.g. engage opportunity targets NO, engage unknowns, NO, Unit hold fire (no ai attacks) selected (possibly Lua enable this one) and it should work?

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 280
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 10:32:11 AM   
deepdive

 

Posts: 124
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
I would like that an unknown contact would freeze in its track (stop jumping around) loose its pointer and fade slowly away, like change to an grey or darker colour, and remove uncertain rings, at least to be selectable, also for those displayed seconds since last fixed position, to be selectable for uncluttering of the map.

Bjørn


(in reply to Tomcat84)
Post #: 281
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 6:15:40 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
For AAW Patrols,

I would like to propose two things

1. Dampen dropping a target. If a contact jumps on the boundary of CAP prosecution area, CAP aircraft will dance around repeatedly running towards contact on afterburners, then returning back to the contact area. This wastes a lot of fuel. Especially noticeable in a jammed environment when CAP cannot get precise fix on a contact, and the contact jumps in-out of the prosecution area. So I propose the change be made if the contact was auto-targeted during CAP mission, this target cannot be dropped earlier than one minute after it was last targeted.

2. Make an transit option for AAW. Currently we do not have that; I mean it would be nice to have the "strict" transit throttle override option for AAW patrols. This way, if the target is already inside the prosecution area, the fighters will still transit towards the patrol area in cruise, rather than wasting all the fuel in afterburners immediately after takeoff.

(in reply to deepdive)
Post #: 282
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 7:02:54 PM   
pepolk0001


Posts: 29
Joined: 12/17/2014
Status: offline
Ability to change color of grouped reference points and shaded patrol/prosecution areas. Ability to show/hide specific missions via the map display menu.

Artist's conception included.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by pepolk0001 -- 12/24/2014 9:32:40 PM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 283
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 10:45:48 PM   
hellfish6


Posts: 835
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

I agree. A support mission or maybe even a patrol mission with Weapons Hold/Tight (e.g. engage opportunity targets NO, engage unknowns, NO, Unit hold fire (no ai attacks) selected (possibly Lua enable this one) and it should work?


Support missions are great for route reconnaissance, but not so great for area recon.

And while I like the idea of LUAs, I'd still like to have the ability to create a recon mission (where the only fire allowed is in self defense - I'd like my recon aircraft to be able to use their AIM-9s or AA-8s if they need to) without having to learn to program a script to do it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Tomcat84)
Post #: 284
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 11:06:03 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5201
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
I completely disagree. I use the support method all the time for area recon. Please explain in detail why it doesn't work.

If you want to be a good scenario designer, I can't understand why you wouldn't use Lua. Its a tool that most other games only dream of. I am no programmer, but see immediately that it allows any scenario designer to do a bunch of things without asking for developer resources for niche features.

(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 285
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/24/2014 11:40:23 PM   
hellfish6


Posts: 835
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I completely disagree. I use the support method all the time for area recon. Please explain in detail why it doesn't work.


Again, this is for an AI side mission. Not a player-controlled mission. I'll give it a shot, but off the top of my head I don't see it giving me the kind of randomness/flexibility I want to have. I know where the enemy units are or will pop up - so I as a designer would give that mission to the AI knowing that I was either intentionally aiding or harming the player.

At least with an AI-controlled area patrol, the result of the recon is more unpredictable AND the aircraft/platform can loiter and investigate contacts (so it spots something at a distance, can close with an investigate it until it's satisfied it can ID the contact). A support mission is effectively on rails, though admittedly I've only used them for AEW, EW and tanker missions so far.

And again, I'd like my aircraft/platform to autonomously perform self-defense. Something I can't recall a support mission allowing for, something a hold-fire command wouldn't allow, and something that might actually be helpful in other mission types as well (so an A-10 can do more than just evade a MiG's missiles without player intervention).

quote:

If you want to be a good scenario designer, I can't understand why you wouldn't use Lua. Its a tool that most other games only dream of. I am no programmer, but see immediately that it allows any scenario designer to do a bunch of things without asking for developer resources for niche features.


First and foremost, I make missions I want to play. I like the missions I've made without LUA so far. If I can suggest a feature that I think could be useful, I'm going to suggest it and let the devs decide if it's worth the effort. I'll learn LUA eventually, but if it can do any of the things I've just mentioned (autonomous investigation without engagement first and foremost, autonomous self defense secondary), I'll go ahead and bite my tongue now.



_____________________________


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 286
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/25/2014 1:16:49 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5201
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Have you even tried the support mission approach. btw, I am talking about AI use. I use loadouts combined with the support mission. I use these so the AI can ID and spot for missile launches all the time.

I just did one where sides were unfriendly until ships were spotted entering a zone. Then they went hostile and SSMs were launched. It worked pretty much as designed on the AI side.

(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 287
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/25/2014 1:43:39 AM   
hellfish6


Posts: 835
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline
Please read what I wrote.

_____________________________


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 288
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/25/2014 2:04:02 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5201
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Regardless...I don't see how they don't work the way you want. I don't see the need for a mission that performs exactly they way you can do it in the game.

(in reply to hellfish6)
Post #: 289
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 1:30:16 AM   
snowburn


Posts: 188
Joined: 9/24/2013
From: Bovril, Argentina
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pepolk0001

Ability to change color of grouped reference points and shaded patrol/prosecution areas. Ability to show/hide specific missions via the map display menu.

Artist's conception included.





yes, please!

(in reply to pepolk0001)
Post #: 290
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 2:01:32 PM   
Helderik

 

Posts: 32
Joined: 6/25/2014
Status: offline
Merry X-mas to all!

First of all, thank you for a great overhaul of my favorite game! You guys did a fantastic job. I am a relative noob to this game, but have been strugling with a few things that I want to mention here. Maybe it can help improve this already fantastic game further. I apologize if my points have been mentioned before by others...

My humble suggestions (in no particular order) for further improvement...

1). Could you please update the override emcon settings question with a check box or something like that to prevent me from clicking this away all the time? It is not a big deal, but speeds up the game. Especially if you switch on radar and OECM, you have to click yes several times...

2). Could you grey-out options that are not available in the 'multiple sensors' window if they are not applicable? Again, only a small thing but this clarifies the game for my and perhaps other less experienced players...

3). I am struggling with the OECM ability of units. New planes like the F35 (are thought to) have really powerful OECM abilities. However, when playing with the F35, I cannot see if the OECM does anything (when not digging into all calculations). Would it be possible to specifically target an object with OECM, just like you target with a normal weapon? A plane could position itself then automatically to align its jammers with a target without having to do this by yourself. Also, besides targeting vectors, illuminating vectors, etc, it would be really nice to see ECM vectors in the same way if your ships / air craft are using ECM. This would make their use easier and traceable... This is the one thing in modern scenario's where I struggle to optimize my attacks... Further, is it possible to damage radars using ECM? If Im correct, modern ECM can damage and even destroy equipment...

4). I typically draw a no-fly zone around important enemy SAM sites if they are known to me to prevent casualties. This typically is a circle with 6-8 ref points. Besides a single ref point and a rectangle, a circle (center and radius) tool would be great... Again, no must have, but definitely nice to have...

Thank you for this great game, I learned so much about modern air/naval operations because of this game!


Erik

(in reply to snowburn)
Post #: 291
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 2:49:30 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Demuder
Make it so we can order weapons with active datalinks to self destruct.


Added.

_____________________________


(in reply to Demuder)
Post #: 292
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 2:51:07 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slicendice
I'd also love to see the final agility factor affected by the amount of time the aircraft spent flying defensive maneuver. But for that to work there has to be a new way to determine target detection first, ideally using probability of detection approach. So there is actually a chance for target to not evade/make belated defensive maneuver.


This has been added on the vote list as "Refine air combat evasion limitations (reduced agility)"

_____________________________


(in reply to slicendice)
Post #: 293
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 2:57:13 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Windom Earle

- 1/3rd rule option for strike missions
- amphibious/air landings


Added both.

_____________________________


(in reply to Windom Earle)
Post #: 294
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 2:58:39 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mcp5500
It would be nice to have a Condition setting in the event editor for: Score Below x, Score above x, and score within range x-a. Thanks


Please post this on the ScenEdit poll.

_____________________________


(in reply to mcp5500)
Post #: 295
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 3:00:48 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kimaera026
2 - Flight operations. Maybe it's being expanded already. That said, I'd like it more customisable, from what I'm seeing in 536. At the moment it's all automatic. Planes are assigned to either parking, hangar, pads, or flight deck, according to some mechanic i'm yet to understand. It'd be better if, in auto, it would assign the ones with a ready loadout to open parking and flight deck, rathen than hangar, which would suit reserve, maintanance, and generally inactive or readying aircraft. And i'd like the option to direct them myself. Say i'm readying a flight of two aicraft for a strike. I want them on the flight deck when their loadout is ready, so I can launch them straight away. Maybe it's already working like this, or maybe not. Or maybe the difference from hangar and flight deck is so small still that it doesnt make a difference. I don't know for sure.


IIRC this has been added in v1.06.

_____________________________


(in reply to kimaera026)
Post #: 296
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/26/2014 3:02:29 PM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KriB
I would like the rule to be "on station". Currently new flights on patrol missions only go up when the old ones are on the way back, which leaves a gap in coverage. The new flights should arrive, and then the RTB can happen.
It is a another factor in the fuel calculations, but I hope it is doable. This is particularly important for AEW missions, as I want complete coverage, all the time.


Added.

_____________________________


(in reply to KewDok)
Post #: 297
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/27/2014 6:12:11 AM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jufinace20
2) Some level of control over unit doctrines in order to enhance the fidelity of the behavior in some situations. For example Libians in the 80's firing at Egyptians, their stock of expensive weapons (e.g. missiles) was limited, and their salvoes would be most probably limited in number (keeping the remaining munitions until the first rounds came by the target).
Right now the AI is always in WWIII mode, very effective, but usually wasting about half the salvo on a burning hulk.


This is coming in v1.07.

_____________________________


(in reply to jufinace20)
Post #: 298
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/27/2014 6:14:51 AM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: djoos5

If I can add to this request post... here is my suggestion for a future event/trigger/action:

Action: Activate NO NAV-ZONE

It would allow us to create a NO NAV ZONE that only activates on the condition set by a trigger. I thought of this as I design my new scenario - there are three bridges crossing the Oda River and if the Player can destroy them, or one of them, it would be the trigger that would activate the NO NAV ZONE at that bridge. By doing this, the tank units trying to get to the bridge to cross would be stuck on the opposite side.

Not sure if that is an easy action to add, but if it is, it would allow for some cool results of bombing runs.





If easy can you please post this on the ScenEdit poll? Thanks!

_____________________________


(in reply to djoos5)
Post #: 299
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 12/27/2014 6:16:40 AM   
Dimitris


Posts: 12651
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vark

How about some improvements to torpedoes?
3 items in particular I can think of:
1- Wires that can be cut/damaged for a variety of reasons (i.e. turning 180 would certainly cut your wires).
2- Once the wires are cut, a torp is hot, i.e. if it sees your sub it will track and kill you if you're not careful.


Added.

quote:


3- Search patterns for torps. Clockwise, counterclockwise, snake, etc...

Already have those IIRC.

_____________________________


(in reply to Vark)
Post #: 300
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   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

0.164