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: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests

 
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: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests Page: <<   < prev  7 8 9 [10] 11   next >   >>
[Poll]

CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests


AMP - Time-on-target automatic strike generator UI
  28% (130)
AMP - Continuous coverage planner
  1% (7)
Scriptless downed/stranded crew (for CSAR)
  2% (10)
Local weather fronts
  10% (48)
Scriptless intermittent sensor settings
  2% (9)
Custom draw on map
  2% (11)
WEGO MP
  3% (16)
Real-time MP
  10% (47)
Scriptless carry-over of units between scenarios
  4% (18)
Ground operations: Make units recognize and use roads
  5% (23)
AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff
  4% (18)
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into ScenEdit
  6% (30)
Warning shots
  2% (9)
Scriptless boarding actions
  0% (3)
Integrated speech-to-text (SeaHag-style)
  2% (11)
Tacview - AAR mode
  4% (21)
Chemical & Biological weapon effects
  2% (9)
Display real-time sonar/self-noise data
  0% (3)
Make A2A-refueling options a doctrine setting
  0% (2)
Have WRA ranges for weapons set in percentage of range rather than 5nm
  0% (2)
Unit "Scoreboard"
  0% (3)
"Search" tool for the cargo list
  0% (1)
Weather/Day-night affects air sorties
  1% (7)
Allow Lua scripting on Losses/Expenditures (for player-tailored stats)
  0% (0)
Enable borders/coastlines at close-in zoom
  2% (11)
Hotkeys for built-in map layers
  0% (1)


Total Votes : 450


(last vote on : 6/15/2021 3:50:23 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/26/2021 6:45:28 PM   
ETF


Posts: 1734
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Hamilton Area, Canada
Status: offline
Real-Time MP - as was hinted at haha just before release :)

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to p1t1o)
Post #: 271
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/26/2021 9:01:46 PM   
TitaniumTrout

 

Posts: 328
Joined: 10/20/2014
From: Michigan
Status: offline
Could a new tab be added for contents of a group?

For example if I have a hostile airfield I can either switch to Unit Mode and hover over each icon, or create a strike mission and look at the units on the list and that's about it. Ideally it would be :



Then when you click on the Grouped Unit tab you would see all of the units contained. This is particularly useful to see if a structure has been destroyed. It would be extra-ideal to have the damage, fire, or flood state, called out here as well.


_____________________________


(in reply to ETF)
Post #: 272
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 1:10:55 AM   
p1t1o

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline
This is a bit random, but a dropdown with the last three searched for things on most search boxes (add-unit search, database search, magazine search etc.) would be a really nice quality-of-life upgrade.


Thanks,
P

(in reply to TitaniumTrout)
Post #: 273
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 8:55:19 AM   
cmanouser1

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/28/2020
Status: offline
Two quality-of-life ideas for submarines:

*in Options->Message Log, we already have "New Weapon contact". Add "New Torpedo contact". This would help in combined forces scenarios where you don't care much about much weapons except for torpedoes that you always care about
* for submarines, in Throttle & Altitude, add a new Depth Preset: in-layer, which would be the middle of the layer (the submarine would adjust automatically to layer changes too).


(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 274
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 7:00:04 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 278
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
When we use satellites in a scenario, the intel they provide is being fed directly to the current situation..

I can imagine that for example an imagery sat has to pass over one of its download ground stations, it hast to be sent to a analysis center. Someone has to study it and the conclusions has to be written down on the imagery and sent to CENTCOM, EUCOM or for Russia or the UK to at least the commander who needs it.

This takes time. And this info is not available in real-time as it is now in the game.

Now the interesting part: how much time is needed for this circle to go round?
Two hours? One hour? 30 minutes?
Who can give a suggestion?

(in reply to ETF)
Post #: 275
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 8:00:50 PM   
Parel803

 

Posts: 387
Joined: 10/10/2019
From: Netherlands
Status: online
Intresting Question. And not only for imagery I guess. Not sure but feels like a tricky path for the game. Very true for Sats but in the game your' either in the net or your not.
I don't have a hard answer on times, guess it depends. But there are many more sits where you don't have all the info from your's partners due to varies reasons. In real life that is.
with regards Gert-Jan

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 276
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 9:22:39 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5160
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
A similar point can be made about reconnaissance aircraft in a pre-digital age. Some even today.

Not sure on processing time but there is also the question of accessibility - could a commander in the tactical world physically get the material? The further back in time you go the less likely that is.

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to Parel803)
Post #: 277
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 2/28/2021 10:07:02 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5905
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
There have been pushes through the years ever since CMNAO/CMO was released about access and use of strategic-level/operational-level recon assets and information. I have built scenarios over the years for myself that replicate the information loop on recon assets. Mostly for air recon before the digital network age. Its a combination of missions, events, comms, lua, and even dynamic sides. The easiest one is keeping a recon unit out of comms until it returns to base. Then you switch comms back on. All of the recon units contacts are now part of the player's information network. Before the comms function was releases, I used side-switching with events to do it. Its pretty easy to do either way.

But this is a scenario designers question. Its not really a question for someone who just plays.

edit: btw, you can use similar processes for satellites. Until the players/designers exhaust the capabilities of the current game to do stuff like this, I would prefer the devs spend their time on other things.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 2/28/2021 10:08:59 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 278
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/1/2021 8:35:58 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5160
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Yeah that would work.

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 279
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/1/2021 7:26:52 PM   
p1t1o

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline
quote:


I would prefer the devs spend their time on other things.



Never dont make a suggestion though.

The devs decide what to spend their time on, as you or anyone would in their position - this thread isnt actually binding. You cant accidentally vote something up too much, because then it might actually be worth doing.

If you dont want the devs to spend time on something, dont suggest it.
If you do, or you want the devs to be the ones to choose, then do.

Sorry, pet peeve, I respectfully leave this as personal opinion to be taken or left at anyone's discretion.


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 280
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/1/2021 7:42:21 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 5905
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
I am allowed a vote also. Especially when the asked for feature is completely doable with existing functions.

I just want to make sure everyone knows you can do this. If you put a request in for something that already exists, someone should point that out.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 3/1/2021 7:44:42 PM >

(in reply to p1t1o)
Post #: 281
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/6/2021 2:54:47 AM   
p1t1o

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline
Small quality-of-life suggestion: add "Go to unit in OoB" to right-click menu.

It is already possible to find a unit in the OoB with existing functions of course, but this would save some time in certain repetitive operations and IMO would make life easier sometimes.

Thanks,
P

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 282
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/21/2021 8:49:04 PM   
sparky577

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 6/18/2016
Status: offline
Real Time Multiplayer would be AMAZING. Even if limited to just 2 players.

Regional weather settings that could change with time would be awesome! Or even a "download live weather" feature that took a snapshot from a database somewhere and did an approximation of weather around the globe.

A toggle for "weather overlay" might be cool.

Request: Could we get a hypothetical Chinese H-20 stealth bomber?

As always, absolutely LOVE this program. Thanks again to everyone on the team!

(in reply to britten)
Post #: 283
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 3/22/2021 1:38:00 PM   
TitaniumTrout

 

Posts: 328
Joined: 10/20/2014
From: Michigan
Status: offline
Some QoL improvement requests. First is the ability to highlight units from the target list. Some scenario designers name individual units, while others do not. This can make it tricky when one wants to remove a particular unit from the strike.

For Example :



Adding something like the "Highlight and Center" button as in the Reference Point Selector from the Patrol Mission interface would be excellent.



Second one, piers have the effective area highlighted to show the applicable area. When you change the rotation of the facility it is very easy to visualize. Could the same be done for runways?



When either striking runways or placing them, this would be nice to get an easier visual of where to send the strikers.



It does display the degree, but a visual would be helpful.

_____________________________


(in reply to sparky577)
Post #: 284
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/15/2021 10:12:16 PM   
p1t1o

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline
Request ability to control height and speed of refuel operations. At the moment it seems set to loiter and 36kft by default, which can waste fuel on long distance refuels, especially when the receiver will be forced below the 36kft cutoff to the next higher fuel consumption level.

Thanks,
P

**edit**
Have figured out you can alter altitude, and Im guessing refueling at loiter is intentional, perhaps finding the basket at Mach 0.8 isnt so desirable.

< Message edited by p1t1o -- 4/22/2021 8:07:22 PM >

(in reply to TitaniumTrout)
Post #: 285
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/23/2021 2:32:45 PM   
guanotwozero

 

Posts: 645
Joined: 12/27/2013
Status: offline
Request: When a Strike mission is created in the mission editor and aircraft assigned, the legs and draggable waypoints be immediately available even if the mission is tasked to happen later.

This would be useful for planning it out, e.g. entering distance/airspeed data in a spreadsheet to get the timing right, particularly if it's to be synchronised with other missions.

(in reply to p1t1o)
Post #: 286
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/23/2021 2:34:37 PM   
eleos


Posts: 63
Joined: 3/21/2016
From: Mesoropi, Macedonia, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

Request: When a Strike mission is created in the mission editor and aircraft assigned, the legs and draggable waypoints be immediately available even if the mission is tasked to happen later.

This would be useful for planning it out, e.g. entering distance/airspeed data in a spreadsheet to get the timing right, particularly if it's to be synchronised with other missions.

quote:

This would be useful for planning it out, e.g. entering distance/airspeed data in a spreadsheet to get the timing right, particularly if it's to be synchronised with other missions.

Be patient

(in reply to guanotwozero)
Post #: 287
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/23/2021 2:48:00 PM   
guanotwozero

 

Posts: 645
Joined: 12/27/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eleos
Be patient

Ah, OK!

(in reply to eleos)
Post #: 288
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/24/2021 11:11:51 AM   
Blast33


Posts: 278
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Bullseye developpers, bullseye!

(in reply to guanotwozero)
Post #: 289
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 4/26/2021 8:40:42 PM   
p1t1o

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline
Suggestion - embed trigger-event functionality from the event handling system into the mission editor, so that mission-active and mission-inactive triggers can be applied easily on a per-mission basis, without needing a seperate event to be created to either/both activate and/or deactivate a mission. Perhaps a seperate tab (where for example, the tabs for strike aircraft and escorts would be) with an "create trigger" button for ON trigger and OFF trigger, which accesses the usual trigger-creation wizard - or allow you to choose an already created trigger. This would be mainly useful in creating enemy AI. All of this is already possible of course, but this may save many steps in controlling missions more finely and reduce clutter in the event handling system allowing easier management.

**edit**

Suggestion - add "AND/OR" toggle to event trigger selection box, ie: "OR" would equal current mechanism, any selected trigger fired, triggers the action. "AND" would require all selected triggers to have fired before the action is triggered.
This would remove the need to create sides and associated score events in the scenario to act as "counters" in many situations, and simplifies the event structure for other types of activity, removing the need for conditions in many cases.

**edit 05/05/2021**

Small QoL suggestion - default the Air Ops screen to all wings collapsed on opening a new window, rather than the topmost wing expanded.

Thanks,
P

< Message edited by p1t1o -- 5/6/2021 1:37:11 AM >

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 290
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/11/2021 4:08:15 PM   
Eggstor

 

Posts: 320
Joined: 1/24/2016
Status: offline
Suggestion - In campaign mode, when advancing from one scenario to another, also add a "End Checkpoint" save of the previous scenario so that, if the succeeding scenario is updated (as a couple of Kashmir Fire scenarios were in a hotfix), one doesn't have to either remember to save before advancing or play through the entirety of the previous scenario to play an updated scenario in campaign mode.

Edit - Either that or change the "checkpoint" system to load the scenario file instead of a save file.

< Message edited by Eggstor -- 5/11/2021 4:19:00 PM >

(in reply to p1t1o)
Post #: 291
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/23/2021 3:25:43 AM   
morphin

 

Posts: 514
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Suggestion: It should be possible to micromanage a unit assigned to a mission. Current behaviour is if a unit is assigned to mission and it is engaged in a fight the computer overrides the manually set course, speed and altitude. So it is actually not possible to micromanage a unit that is assigned to a mission in a fight. Even the Flag "automatic evasion" set to no and "ignore plotted course" to No doesn't change this behaviour.

Thank you very much for consider changing this behaviour. It would allow to micromanage a unit while fighting and then after the fight the unit can continue the mission.

(in reply to Eggstor)
Post #: 292
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/23/2021 9:51:31 AM   
SkyhawkSG1

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 2/2/2020
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morphin

Suggestion: It should be possible to micromanage a unit assigned to a mission. Current behaviour is if a unit is assigned to mission and it is engaged in a fight the computer overrides the manually set course, speed and altitude. So it is actually not possible to micromanage a unit that is assigned to a mission in a fight. Even the Flag "automatic evasion" set to no and "ignore plotted course" to No doesn't change this behaviour.

Thank you very much for consider changing this behaviour. It would allow to micromanage a unit while fighting and then after the fight the unit can continue the mission.


So you actually want your pilots to be suicidal idiots?

_____________________________

Big guns never tire.

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 293
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/23/2021 9:56:58 AM   
SkyhawkSG1

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 2/2/2020
From: Poland
Status: offline
Suggestion - Add a 'minimum altitude' setting to mission editor altitude settings area.
For instance if I set a AAW patrol enagagement altitude bands to minimum 6000 feet then the AAW patrol/escort will not let itself get dragged into a dogfight below that altitude where it would most likely lose. It will maintain altitude advantage.

_____________________________

Big guns never tire.

(in reply to SkyhawkSG1)
Post #: 294
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/23/2021 3:42:24 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 514
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SkyhawkSG1


quote:

ORIGINAL: morphin

Suggestion: It should be possible to micromanage a unit assigned to a mission. Current behaviour is if a unit is assigned to mission and it is engaged in a fight the computer overrides the manually set course, speed and altitude. So it is actually not possible to micromanage a unit that is assigned to a mission in a fight. Even the Flag "automatic evasion" set to no and "ignore plotted course" to No doesn't change this behaviour.

Thank you very much for consider changing this behaviour. It would allow to micromanage a unit while fighting and then after the fight the unit can continue the mission.


So you actually want your pilots to be suicidal idiots?


??? I don't unterstand, but if you don't micromanage the current code is that if you set speed to afterburner, altitude to minimum and course to hide behind a mountain then the AI automatic set altitude to 36000, speed to cruise and direction against incoming missile so for me that is a sucidal reaction of the AI (If it is assigned to a mission). Much better to micrmanage the AC, but unfortunately you can not use the big advantage of using misisons to simply routine task with micromanage fights. You have to unassign for fighting.... That is a real drackback for this people who would like to micromanage the fights

(in reply to SkyhawkSG1)
Post #: 295
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 5/26/2021 3:57:40 AM   
cdnice


Posts: 150
Joined: 5/7/2009
From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Quality of life suggestion. Ability to make the cone for ports smaller to better fit bases located on rivers inland from shore, could also be used to simulate rivers or canals where the real altitude above sea level does not allow passage.

_____________________________



(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 296
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 6/5/2021 5:19:51 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 1291
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
It would be nice if when you select a unit in the import unit dialog, it would appear ghosted on the map. The idea is it would save you adding all units and going through deletion steps in the case that you didn't really know the position of all units or bases for a scenario and didn't need them all. Example: I am building a Poland scenario and don't really know airbase positions from memory. I add them all and then have to go through delete the bases I don't need. This is definitely a nice to have kind of request. Just saves editors a few steps.

Mike

(in reply to cdnice)
Post #: 297
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 6/5/2021 5:28:07 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 1291
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
It would be great if there was a UI method to ready aircraft before the scenario start, so they are ready at scenario start. The idea is that players can set their initial loadouts without the loadout time penalty under the assumption that they made this decision before the scenario start.

This could be done in scenario edit since day one and lua since the functions became available, but it's a common enough thing to maybe ask for a UI implementation.

Mike

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 298
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 6/5/2021 9:16:23 PM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: online
LUA: ScenEdit_GetEMCON() to similarly match ScenEdit_SetEMCON();
Suggest returning a table of:
If not operating on a unit (ie a group,mission,side): 
 {OECM='Active'|'Passive',Radar='Active'|'Passive',Sonar='Active'|'Passive'}
If unit then:
 {OECM='Active'|'Passive',Radar='Active'|'Passive',Sonar='Active'|'Passive',obeyEMCON=true|false}

At present one can not query the current state of EMCON on a unit or upper level doctrine (outside of obeyEMCON at the unit leve), one can set it of course but not get the state before changes are made, which prevents restoration of a prior state at a later time, or knowing if a change is even necessary.


< Message edited by KnightHawk75 -- 6/5/2021 9:17:05 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 299
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests - 6/5/2021 11:53:48 PM   
stww2

 

Posts: 125
Joined: 5/23/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BDukes

It would be great if there was a UI method to ready aircraft before the scenario start, so they are ready at scenario start. The idea is that players can set their initial loadouts without the loadout time penalty under the assumption that they made this decision before the scenario start.

This could be done in scenario edit since day one and lua since the functions became available, but it's a common enough thing to maybe ask for a UI implementation.

Mike


I second this. I've seen a couple scenarios that build in extra time to allow the player to choose the loadouts, and while it's a solution that is probably "good enough," it's a tad bit suboptimal.

< Message edited by stww2 -- 6/5/2021 11:55:06 PM >

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 300
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 9 [10] 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests Page: <<   < prev  7 8 9 [10] 11   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

0.451