Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Planned Improvements to the Cargo model??

 
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 >> Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 1:09:05 AM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
Hi All,

Well, now that I have deployed an MEU from a ESG, I am looking at what I can do with it. Some questions, and suggestions:

1. A landed detachment is a single unit created from multiple units disembarked. To know what is actually it you need to look at the Weapons Mounts. Any future possibility of just dropping the actual individual unit and auto-grouping all units, so that only 1 is placed on the map? I was thinking of a LUA script that can take these units and form their more proper database forms (platoons or companies). However, CMANO LUA doesn't allow deleting mounts which would be needed for this idea. If the original "cargo based" unit was just a unit from a LUA perspective, they could be simply grouped and re-grouped as desired (manually or with LUA).

2. Will the cargo database be widely increased in the future, or are you looking for community input from here on out? Examples -
- The only soldiers in there have 7.62mm (so I think the dev for this feature was a bit RED biased, haha). 5.56 should be there, but also different sizes, including 12 for a fairly generic squad. All variants for the Hummer I think should also be include to. Other logistics non-combat items need to be added if you are trying to simulate the real and proper deployment of a large unit.

3. This is more about a possible bug - I "think" there is an air-droppable flag on each cargo unit. I've tried and failed to para-drop medium cargo units like Spoon Rest Radar vehicles, Sentinel Radar, Strikers, etc. and they wont drop, even though I can get BMDs, Hummers, and other well known droppable vehicles to work. If there is indeed such a flag for each cargo unit, a) we need to see this flag in edit cargo and in cargo details once loaded b) in cargo mission, these units should not appear as cargo items to unload (I can have these undroppable units assigned in the mission, and the mission will be ruined because it constantly tries to paradrop and fails). If the flag exists, in the interim can the list of vehicles which are allowed to be paradropped be given? (and a debate can ensue for items that should or very well could be)

Cheers,
Dan

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Dan109 -- 5/26/2017 11:59:10 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 8:14:51 AM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
Regarding #3, I re-read a post from someone else not being able to airdrop cargo, and Baloogan revealed there is a flag and listed the units. (kudos, it seems great thought was put into that list, as I have been researching airdroppable weapons and all Rus/USA weapons I have found are on your list).

Can that list, which is currently small, be added to the manual addendum? That will help remind people that there is a flag and give great examples of what is airdroppable (The current list is small, so the manual can refer to it as examples to make it future proof). Nevertheless, we still need to see my recommendations A and B - others will make the mistake a few of us have had, and have our air transports fly out and never drop the cargo.


(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 2
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 9:23:55 AM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
4. Range Issues with Cargo Mission - aircraft and surface vessels have different behaviors, both of which are not ideal at all, if the mission area exceeds the range of the cargo delivery craft. For aircraft, sure it will launch and do its best, but then it RTBs back to base when it BINGOs (court marshall the logistics planner!!!). Of course the player should eventually understand this, but I can't think of a way at all in LUA to check and realize that this is happening. Because you have that beautiful "Issues" panel in the cargo mission, it would be great that when the aircraft is assigned to the mission, if the loadout's mission range exceeds the distance between the mothership and target, an error for that craft should show up in the issues panel, and the aircraft should not launch if it is ignored by the player. From the scenario designer side, I guess the designer will need to realize this potential problem and plan accordingly. The check for this should be repeated every 60s, for the case of an amphib assault. In a scenario where you are performing an amphib assault (the mothership MOVES), then my suggestion helps the player and the designer, as amphib assault missions can be planned and activated before you are in range, and will execute once the range check is successful. Then players don't have to check constantly to see if they are in range, and designers can setup the mission immediately as well, and not worry about range checks.

Surface vessel cargo carriers have a different behavior. If they are not in range, they just DONT LAUNCH. No way to realize this, as I just found out launching an amphib assault with my LCACs (LCAC seems to be hardcoded for 50nm cargo radius, which I disagree with, it should be 100nm, as it has a 300nm range empty and 200nm with normal max load - you don't have reserves nor account for the overloaded weight fuel usage, which its current capacity is spec-ed to, so I'd agree to 75nm radius - current naval doctrine is to launch at 65nm away - you don't want to disappoint CMANO Pro users). So, no error, no understanding, the surface vessel won't launch if not in range - perfect behavior IMO, but no error/warning to the player in the cargo mission window...AND, I just tested that if you move the mothership into range, the vessel launches automatically. So, I don't think for my aircraft proposal, you need to develop an audit, just have them a) behave like surface vessel cargo carriers and not launch if not in range b) have an error in the cargo mission window to explain why.

Now midair refueling for cargo aircraft to help them get to their journey, that's pretty advanced, so maybe save that option for the 'advanced mission planner' feature. Heh, I also need to do research into if the LCAC/SSC has ever considered at-sea refueling, as the 65nm marker used by planners is determined by the range of a silkworm missile, but China's anti-ship BM is still in range and the navy/usmc is worrying about those getting proliferated. I'm gonna play around with the ESB/ETB and see if I can model in extended range.

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 3
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 11:49:05 AM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
5. Docking Ops needs a red colored "READY NOW" button when used with Scenario Editor, just like in aircraft loadouts - as well with a set ready time button, to be complete

6. This is certainly a feature request, but to help surface cargo vessels behave a bit more like their airborne brethren, it would be nice for them to have LOADOUTS. Why? Well, as I have learned the game, I now have come to fully realize one important reason why adding weapons to aircraft isn't really 'supported'. The added weight of weapons does NOT affect fuel consumption. And, I have realized that the EXACT weight of the cargo does not affect airborne or seabased cargo carriers. Not a big deal with aircraft, as you have loadouts for weight based range. Well, the same should be for seaborne cargo carriers. There will be scenarios where someone wants to load half the max weight and gain distance, just like with aircraft. I think seaborne also needs that option.

7. I see that cargo is dropped off immediately with no unloading time. This can be quite ok for paradropping (maybe a few minutes MAX), but for helos with internal cargo and seaborne vessels, this isn't realistic. Naval planners use 30min to unload an LCAC. Actually, I think is maybe specific for the LCAC, as it has to deflate to unload. The vehicles should then just drive off. Cargo (water, fuel, etc) I suppose should be palletized, with some forklift available. Anyways, so maybe helos with internal cargo, the vehicles (haven't tried yet to fit one in, I'll check out that russian huge transport copter) and soldiers can just drive out immediately, but with a 1 minute unload time. However. the LCAC definitely needs more time to unload than what you currently have. I haven't tried ROs, but I imagine there is a "docking" time with those to simulate setting up the ramps.

8. I landed an LCAC at the Montford Point ESD (doesn't have cargo space/weight, I'll submit a DB update request), and I noticed that it refueled, but because of no cargo, it still spent the traditional 30min unloading time. Now I'm not sure exactly what is going on, as there is unfortunately in Air or Docking Ops, no state showing what is happening with the cargo. It just goes into that "readying" state.

9. More realistic timings for loading phase, for trooper transport - I understand 30min to load up an LCAC, or a C-5 Galaxy, but its frustrating to see 30min loading time to put 24 troops on an Osprey. Now I know this same debate has come up with aircraft refueling/loading weapons (why can't I just refuel and take off again with the same weapons?) - I get that, and agree with your sortie model for the most part (if out of fuel, get an airborne tanker). But I think realistically for trooper transport, refueling/loading time should be kept to a minimum, as the sortie rate needs to be as fast as possible. Throughout playing with this feature, I have been thinking also of setting up a Vietnam and/or a modern day Air Cav troop deployment. 30 minutes for a squad to get on a Huey? I think Col. Hal Moore would have been dead before his 2nd wave showed up.

10. Surface Ships Dropping off cargo without a homeport - well, I figured out Baloogan's suggestion to re-create Red Storm Rising Icelandic Invasion, crashing a freighter on land to drop off troops. VERY COOL. But I found a flaw in your design. If the ship has a homeport assigned, it will drop off the troops, and "go back to base". This mechanic works great for LCACs, LCUs, Patrol Boats, etc, but unfortunately this behavior happens for ANY ship trying to do this. I even did it with my LHA - it immediately dropped off ALL cargo (no unloading time as well), and proceeded to go back to base. While I like the ability to crash any ship into land and unload (needs a timer though), only certain vessels like amphibious landing craft, should be able to do this. This does include ANY vessel with a very low draft. I'm not sure how you would solve this besides giving every vessel a new field, allowing them to amphib land. Maybe just add a new property type to allow this, call it "low draft amphibious capable".

11. RO/ROs - I wanted to mention this here, rather than a database request. How can I test RO/RO?? I've looked and looked, and no ship that HAS cargo defined is RO/RO capable, and the ships that are RO/RO capable (like the US Sealift Command vessels, and ESB/ETBs) have no cargo assigned to them. I know its a decent amount of DB work you guys need to do to get all of the Commercial and Military Cargo ships updated, but does anyone know of a ship that has cargo and is RO/RO??

That's it for now! Thanks for reading and responding!

< Message edited by Dan109 -- 5/26/2017 11:51:23 AM >

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 4
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 12:00:21 PM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
Oops - I should have done this on the first post - added the scenario I have been testing - should have all the units setup so you can easily recreate the issues/observations I have made.

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 5
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 1:53:31 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4321
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Wow, that's a lot of good stuff. I look forward to the responses. I want to build several Bde/Regt level amphibious scenarios for NF, just need to find the time.

Thanks for your insights.

B

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 6
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 2:29:00 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Ok added this to our list. Will leave this up to the designing dev to comment on but given he's coming off a major project it could be a few to digest.

Thanks

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 2:42:06 PM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
Np, no need for a quick reply. However, I'd appreciate it if I can get an example of a ship with ro/ro capability. I'd like to play around with lcac-esb-RO/transport capability, as I may generate more questions/suggestions/bugreports.

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 8
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 2:53:33 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Not sure Port to Port is there yet but LST's should beach and dump their loads. Likewise, most landing craft connectors if they can carry vehicles.

Thanks

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 9
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 8:56:25 PM   
Tailhook

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 1/18/2015
Status: offline
Couple of things I was curious about and decided to test. Scenario is attached

12 - Is there a way to ferry cargo from one base to another and then have it usable? For instance, I put platoon of tanks plus a Patriot battery of 6 TELs and their radar at Travis AFB and fly them to NAS Lemoore in Cargo planes. Problem is that, unless I'm missing something (I didn't see this in Baloogans video), I can't "unload" the battery from the airport once they've arrived. I can get them off the jets just fine using Load/Unload Cargo, but from there I don't see an option to deploy them from the base itself. Cargo missions require a reference point to parachute/amphib assault. There also seems to be no way to load an existing unit on to the base besides the editor, although this makes sense from the differences in a "disembarked unit" rather than a dedicated facility. I understand that LUA could still be used to teleport a unit the old fashioned way but I was just playing around.

13 - Related to above, once they arrive and are unloaded there is no way to tell which facility on base they are actually sent to. It seems that it's the top of the list, in this case Runway 14R. If there is a change implemented so that you can deploy from an airbase it'd be nice if you could choose where in the base they get sent, or at least get informed where they are. I had to click through every building to find them which can be very tedious on big bases.

14 - Once at an airbase they handle damage oddly. In the provided scenario let it run for a few minutes so that the C-5s bring all the units to Lemoore. Unload the units at Lemoore. They should go to runway 14R. Then switch sides and use the Chinese bomber to attack the runway they're on, which should be 14R/32L. If you switch to the other side again you should get a message saying you've lost units and others have suffered damage. You'll see them in the losses and expenditures. However, you can still load every single unit (including the lost ones) back into the Cargo jets and fly them back to Travis. I didn't experiment with paratroopers to see what happens if you try to drop a "destroyed" unit as I was only messing around with airfield deployments.

15 - Unrelated to the above scenarios, but I'm curious if the ability to transfer weapons will be modeled down the road? I know you can add it via the editor (which led to a hilarious case where I had a C-17 armed with 140+ AMRAAMs...) but was wondering if this is something that is being looked at. It would be awesome in say "Don of a New Era" to transfer the English Typhoons with their missiles to a Turkish base closer to the action via a cargo aircraft for the weapons.

Edit* 16 - To experiment, I added the same SAM bty of 9 units to an LPD offshore and had them unload via LCAC using the cargo mission successfully. However, after flying a target aircraft over them, none of the launchers from the Patriots could connect to the AN/MPQ-65 radar to launch. Seems like this could cause serious issues if one attempts to transfer a SAM bty as cargo

All in all I love the new features, and I don't want to seem disappointed. On the contrary, you guys did some awesome work with this cargo model. I just hope to see it expanded down the road (as well as issue number 14 brought to light).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tailhook -- 5/26/2017 10:12:11 PM >

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 10
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 9:22:32 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Added this to our list. Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Tailhook)
Post #: 11
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/26/2017 9:30:44 PM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
Great Info Tailhook, would you mind changing your numbering scheme to be sequential after mine? This can perhaps begin to be an end-all cargo thread, and with dozens of topics, keeping them organized would be ideal.

Heh, yeah, for transferring weapons, I remember a scenario in Northern Infern, where I needed to ferry ASW Torpedoes from a Helicopter Base to a larger airfield that had P-3s and had run out of Torpedoes (I think for any AWS craft, the weapon should be optional, so you can still launcher with your more valuable sono-bouys). I had to launch the helis manually, change home base to the P-3 airfield, land, and then re-ready with ferry option, and repeat over and over. They left their torpedoes in the airbase magazine, allowing my P-3s to launch. Nevertheless, my homemade re-supply effort with 2 torps per sortie SUCKED!!!

(in reply to Tailhook)
Post #: 12
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/27/2017 12:00:44 AM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 12715
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

12 - There also seems to be no way to load an existing unit on to the base besides the editor, although this makes sense from the differences in a "disembarked unit" rather than a dedicated facility. I understand that LUA could still be used to teleport a unit the old fashioned way but I was just playing around.

Teleport is so old school ..
Cargo-related items on my Lua list:
'TransferCargo( fromUnit, toUnit, table_cargo_list)' and
'UnloadCargo(fromUnit [, table_cargo_list])' - haven't quite decide on how this one will work yet, but mostly likely as per the 'Unload cargo' menu item.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 13
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/27/2017 1:40:40 AM   
RoryAndersonWS


Posts: 1778
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Ok added this to our list. Will leave this up to the designing dev to comment on but given he's coming off a major project it could be a few to digest.

Thanks

Mike


Thanks Mike,
Some great cargo comments/ideas here, will take a bit to digest.

quote:

3. This is more about a possible bug - I "think" there is an air-droppable flag on each cargo unit. I've tried and failed to para-drop medium cargo units like Spoon Rest Radar vehicles, Sentinel Radar, Strikers, etc. and they wont drop, even though I can get BMDs, Hummers, and other well known droppable vehicles to work. If there is indeed such a flag for each cargo unit, a) we need to see this flag in edit cargo and in cargo details once loaded b) in cargo mission, these units should not appear as cargo items to unload (I can have these undroppable units assigned in the mission, and the mission will be ruined because it constantly tries to paradrop and fails). If the flag exists, in the interim can the list of vehicles which are allowed to be paradropped be given? (and a debate can ensue for items that should or very well could be)

Next build will have this air-droppable flag visible, a list of cargo that can be paradopped is available http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4287880 for DB3K.

_____________________________


Command Developer, Warfare Sims.
Command Videos: http://youtube.com/baloogan
http://baloogancampaign.com

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 14
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/27/2017 1:54:26 AM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
17 - Cargo priority order - I've noticed when shipping out my cargo units, that the heaviest items are on top, and lightest on bottom. This appears to be the case when I edit cargo or in the Cargo Mission window. When the cargo mission is executed, the units loaded seem to start from the lightest and go up. Case in point, with my attached save from the first post, if you look at LSD 41 Whibdey Island, it has 32xHMMWVs, 20xLAVs, and 4xM1A1s. What I would like to do is have it send in 20xLAVs using the LACs on the first sortie, 4xM1A1s on the 2nd Sortie, and then HMMVWs follow up last (ground infantry should already be on the ground from the V-22 Air Assault, so HMMVWs during this phase would really just be for weapons platoons/company). However, it does seem to grab a smorgasbord of the units to send out via the LCACs. When I had ALL of the land cargo units on the LHA, in fact the M1A1s were sent LAST, however if you try the scenario as is, LSD 41 will send out 1x1M1A along with 11xLAVs and several HMMVWs. So, I'm looking for a way to have more granular control over the order of the shipped units. When Ammo will be able to be sent, I imagine certain weapons will have much higher priority than others.

18 - In Load Cargo window, on the receiver side, we have unload and unload all as options. However, if I want to unload EVERYTHING and start over, I have to go to each cargo type, and hit unload. I think it would be useful to have an "unload craft" option, which makes the cargo craft unload everything with one simple button click.

(in reply to RoryAndersonWS)
Post #: 15
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/28/2017 12:57:13 PM   
ParachuteProne

 

Posts: 179
Joined: 8/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tailhook

Couple of things I was curious about and decided to test. Scenario is attached

12 - Is there a way to ferry cargo from one base to another and then have it usable? For instance, I put platoon of tanks plus a Patriot battery of 6 TELs and their radar at Travis AFB and fly them to NAS Lemoore in Cargo planes. Problem is that, unless I'm missing something (I didn't see this in Baloogans video), I can't "unload" the battery from the airport once they've arrived. I can get them off the jets just fine using Load/Unload Cargo, but from there I don't see an option to deploy them from the base itself. Cargo missions require a reference point to parachute/amphib assault. There also seems to be no way to load an existing unit on to the base besides the editor, although this makes sense from the differences in a "disembarked unit" rather than a dedicated facility. I understand that LUA could still be used to teleport a unit the old fashioned way but I was just playing around.

13 - Related to above, once they arrive and are unloaded there is no way to tell which facility on base they are actually sent to. It seems that it's the top of the list, in this case Runway 14R. If there is a change implemented so that you can deploy from an airbase it'd be nice if you could choose where in the base they get sent, or at least get informed where they are. I had to click through every building to find them which can be very tedious on big bases.

14 - Once at an airbase they handle damage oddly. In the provided scenario let it run for a few minutes so that the C-5s bring all the units to Lemoore. Unload the units at Lemoore. They should go to runway 14R. Then switch sides and use the Chinese bomber to attack the runway they're on, which should be 14R/32L. If you switch to the other side again you should get a message saying you've lost units and others have suffered damage. You'll see them in the losses and expenditures. However, you can still load every single unit (including the lost ones) back into the Cargo jets and fly them back to Travis. I didn't experiment with paratroopers to see what happens if you try to drop a "destroyed" unit as I was only messing around with airfield deployments.

15 - Unrelated to the above scenarios, but I'm curious if the ability to transfer weapons will be modeled down the road? I know you can add it via the editor (which led to a hilarious case where I had a C-17 armed with 140+ AMRAAMs...) but was wondering if this is something that is being looked at. It would be awesome in say "Don of a New Era" to transfer the English Typhoons with their missiles to a Turkish base closer to the action via a cargo aircraft for the weapons.

Edit* 16 - To experiment, I added the same SAM bty of 9 units to an LPD offshore and had them unload via LCAC using the cargo mission successfully. However, after flying a target aircraft over them, none of the launchers from the Patriots could connect to the AN/MPQ-65 radar to launch. Seems like this could cause serious issues if one attempts to transfer a SAM bty as cargo

All in all I love the new features, and I don't want to seem disappointed. On the contrary, you guys did some awesome work with this cargo model. I just hope to see it expanded down the road (as well as issue number 14 brought to light).


12 - Too funny. I spent hours trying to figure out how to get units out of the base. As far as I can tell you cannot at this stage.
This is kinda a big thing.
Hoping all ships and subs will eventually get some sealift capacity at some point. Same with boats. Big job I'm sure.
Maybe start with subs so they can land SF and saboteurs.


If cargo/mounts are transported instead of actual units perhaps a "form unit" button to draw the mounts back into actual Nation specific units on the ground.
Not sure how actual men are represented though.

< Message edited by ParachuteProne -- 5/28/2017 1:36:41 PM >

(in reply to Tailhook)
Post #: 16
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 5/28/2017 1:35:07 PM   
Doctorwarthog

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 4/15/2017
Status: offline
The ability to transport (land, airdrop) actual units is something I'd love to see one day. IE so I can place a unit near an military base for example, and then tell it to board an aircraft or a ship at that base. But I do understand it would be a complex and tedious thing to implent into the game.

(in reply to ParachuteProne)
Post #: 17
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 6/12/2017 12:10:18 PM   
AlphaSierra

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 2/13/2017
Status: offline
Hi Michael

any suggestions about unloading cargo?

ScenEdit_UnloadCargo({fromUnit="RancudoPier2",cargoList={dbid=2985,2}})

just gets: ERROR: [string "Console"]:1: attempt to call global 'ScenEdit_UnloadCargo' (a nil value)

Would love any help

Thanks,

HP



_____________________________

I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way. -John Paul Jones

(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 18
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 6/12/2017 7:14:48 PM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
That appears to be a beta function, not currently available. It's complaining that it has no idea of the function you are calling, not complaining of the parameters. But, in regards to your Parms, for the unit selector, you need name AND side, or just guid.

(in reply to AlphaSierra)
Post #: 19
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 6/12/2017 7:24:02 PM   
AlphaSierra

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 2/13/2017
Status: offline
Blast It! Foiled again!

That's sort of what I thought but hoped it worked.

Thanks Dan!

_____________________________

I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way. -John Paul Jones

(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 20
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 6/12/2017 7:25:19 PM   
Dan109

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doctorwarthog

The ability to transport (land, airdrop) actual units is something I'd love to see one day. IE so I can place a unit near an military base for example, and then tell it to board an aircraft or a ship at that base. But I do understand it would be a complex and tedious thing to implent into the game.


Well, if we get an SE_AddCargo function in the future, scripts can be written to allow loading with a variety of conditions, and can faithfully remove the real units from the map. I haven't tried it yet, but SE_MsgBox could be used to display choices and the buttons original intentions can be hijacked to allow a player to make a choice. Only 3 buttons on the window though - it's a shame that a more generic construct for this function wasn't put in to allow you great dialogue with the scenario. I'd be happy with being able to have 3 genetic buttons and a data entry window. You could therefore display several choices, enter the one you want, and the 3 buttons can be used to NextPage, PrevPage, or Exit the pages of choices.

(in reply to Doctorwarthog)
Post #: 21
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 8/7/2017 11:37:15 PM   
temkc5

 

Posts: 77
Joined: 10/11/2015
Status: offline
19 - The AAV-P7/A1 is an amphibious troop transport(connector capable) used by U.S. Marine Corps Assault Amphibian Battalions to land the surface assault elements of the landing force and their equipment in a single lift from assault shipping during amphibious operations to inland objectives and to conduct mechanized operations.

Could the diamond shaped port access technology be applied to this vehicle
and
be placed in the docking well

19+ Just placing AAV-P7/A1 in the docking well would be a big help

_____________________________

Non mihi, Non tibi, Sed nobis


(in reply to Dan109)
Post #: 22
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 8/8/2017 7:24:32 AM   
Grazyn

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 10/24/2016
Status: offline
I posted it in the feature request thread but this is probably the better place, is there a way to search the cargo list for a specific name? Or is it planned in the future?

(in reply to temkc5)
Post #: 23
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 8/8/2017 7:15:14 PM   
tjhkkr


Posts: 2420
Joined: 6/3/2010
Status: offline
Like Grazyn said: this seems to be a good place to discuss this...
I hope I am not stepping on your post Dan109...
Is there a way to add cargo via HTML (not lua)... I think I saw MikMyk do that with aircraft.
Speaking of which, I am looking for that posting... does anyone know where that is?

_____________________________

Remember that the evil which is now in the world will become yet more powerful, and that it is not evil which conquers evil, but only love -- Olga Romanov.

(in reply to Grazyn)
Post #: 24
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 4/9/2018 5:19:22 AM   
temkc5

 

Posts: 77
Joined: 10/11/2015
Status: offline
Bump

Any updates from the developers?

(in reply to tjhkkr)
Post #: 25
RE: Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? - 4/11/2018 6:28:34 AM   
FlyForLenin

 

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/7/2018
Status: offline
I think an amphibious model and at least somewhat more refined land model is needed in conjunction with what was said here.

Currently, all infantryman fire 7.62mm MG bursts, and even though there are units with only one guy in them- namely the Infantry Sec (Observation Post), and in the CWDB, Medic (x1), there is no "Generic 9mm Pistol" or something to that like in the database for them (units with 1 x personnel, or units that would have pistols) to carry. Also, despite only having 1 x personnel in them, these mounts are treated more like vehicles, as they can be "damaged" and then "repaired". With ground vehicles, there does not seem to be any difference between basic AP and HE shells, as these are equally capable of killing tanks. Finally, some of the infantry units are confusing- regular infantry platoons, with 4 x Infantry Sec (7.62mm MG/Unguided Anti-Tank Weapon), should have 16 personnel in them, according to the cargo information, but they only have four 7.62mm MGs between the individual infantrymen. Finally, APCs and trucks cannot carry infantryman. Tanks technically could also carry them hypothetically.

Amphibious vehicles- namely the AAV-P7/A1 and LVT series- should theoretically be able to drive on land and support the infantry they carried, but can only work as transports in the game right now. There are a number of amphibious vehicles that are either modelled solely as land vehicles or solely as watercraft, and this should be rectified.

I hope this doesn't count as reviving an old thread, as temkc5 bumped it, and upon seeing it I wanted to make some comments.

_____________________________

Formerly known as Project2035 and TyeeBanzai

(in reply to temkc5)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Planned Improvements to the Cargo model?? Page: [1]
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

0.172