RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
Dimitris
Posts: 13506
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

Post by Dimitris »

Following the successful debut of the ScenEdit running poll, we are expanding the concept to "normal" gameplay feature requests.

Don't forget that when your voted request is resolved and thus disappears from the poll, you can re-cast your vote to another one.

*IMPORTANT NOTE*: If a request is voted on top it doesn't necessarily mean it will be the one that will first be resolved, as there can be a number of reasons that prevent us from addressing it at that point. It will, however, make us note it as being a highly desirable element for the users.

Added a few that have stood out to start with, feel free to suggest more.

Thanks!

Meroka37
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:12 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Meroka37 »

I would like to include the chance to edit waypoints (speed, altitude, depth, etc)
'Better honor without ships, than ships without honor"
User avatar
ExMachina
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:30 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by ExMachina »

I would nominate:

1) Add way point orders (even if just for basic F2 and EMCON functions)
2) User defined constraints on AI weapons allocations--e.g. every weapons' mount assignable as "off limits" to AI

EDIT: looks like option 1 has just been added to the poll. since it's too late for me to change my vote, please consider this as a "+1" for way point orders [:)]
User avatar
Primarchx
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:29 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Primarchx »

I voted for "Set speed/alt per waypoint". Close seconds would be "Per-weapon manual withhold option" & "Refine air combat evasion limitations (reduced agility)"
Tomcat84
Posts: 1952
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:13 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Tomcat84 »

Speed alter per waypoint (plus sensor usage, and ideally also preplanned weapon/air launched decoy employment). This is similar to my scenedit poll answer because it will both improve the gameplay as a player, as well as greatly increase the abilities to create a challenging AI side as a scenario designer.

Second place is for Refine air combat evasion limitations, with agility currently being too large a factor.
My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )
Blas de Lezo
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:07 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Blas de Lezo »

Speed and Alt in waypoints plus ETE or ETA
ronl
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:50 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by ronl »

I would highly suggest additional optional 'zoom windows' to allow multiple views of the battlefield.

RjL
User avatar
Primarchx
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:29 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Primarchx »

From what I understand, doing this with Command would be extremely difficult. As someone who had to run three simultaneous, geographically separated engagements in a game last night, it would be handy.
ORIGINAL: ronl

I would highly suggest additional optional 'zoom windows' to allow multiple views of the battlefield.

RjL
User avatar
Brausepaul
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 7:54 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Deutschland

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Brausepaul »

I chose performance as I think / hope that handling of the map can be greatly improved.
Banquet
Posts: 1169
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: England

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Banquet »

All of them would be great in the long term. For the short term I voted for crew abilities (and even better add in situationally changing morale as well)

My 2nd choice would be to improve the sound (not music, just CiC type radio chatter, etc)

Also (what the hell) - not listed, but I'd like to see...

spacebar to pause/unpause game - so many games do this now, I just whack the spacebar automatically when I want to pause anything!

remember the position of windows so I don't have to keep positioning them on dual monitor setup



ronl
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:50 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by ronl »

The automatic repositioning of windows is something they are working on.... I think I read that somewhere. Can't find it now.

F12 seems fine for pause for me....

RjL
User avatar
Primarchx
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:29 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Primarchx »

I've mapped a convenient button on my game mouse for Pause.
User avatar
Agathosdaimon
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 2:42 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Agathosdaimon »

ORIGINAL: Blas de Lezo

Speed and Alt in waypoints plus ETE or ETA

I think this also, so that one can better coordinate plans
miller7219
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:59 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by miller7219 »

Set speed/altitude per way point voted for without hesitation. I would go further and add the ability to issue auto/manual attack orders, sensor setting, and ROE options by way point too. Speed/Altitude is a good start, though.

Items not on the current voting list, but I'd support if they were:

1. Addition of a mini jump map window. You can't scroll the map by using the typical mouse to the window edge, so your left with the arrow keys only to scroll or to right click the main window in the direction you'd like to go. It's unwieldy at best to get around the large map scenarios with assets spread out over 100's or 1000's of miles. Seems like having the ability to create smaller windows is not feasible due to coding limitations, so is a mini jump map possible?

2. Engress/Egress options in the mission editor or ROE. If you don't want to micro-manage then setting items such at altitude profile to and from target, engage targets of opportunity en route or on return, the ability to set multiple targets (primary, secondary, etc) and possible what (what and how much ordinance to drop on each). These are just some possibilities that come to mind. The Mission Editor and ROE options are probably a topic for a dedicated thread elsewhere. but I would definitely vote for developing a more robust Mission Editor/ROE options.

3. Add more keyboard short cuts....debatable what functions should get keyboard shortcuts.

4. Remembering of user map preferences

5. More information added in various places, like ranges added to the Aircraft and Load Out windows or sensor status added to the unit card along the right, for example. I'm sure others have more info they'd like added here and there to help the player and simplify/reduce the mouse clicks.

6. More user friendly links. For example, double click on a mount/loadout/sensor from the weapon/aircraft/load out/contact windows and it not only takes you to that unit's entry in the database, but scrolls directly to that particular mount/sensor/load out that was clicked on. Would reduce tremendously the scroll time to find necessary info! Again, I'm sure others have their own ideas here too.


Stevechase
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:37 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Stevechase »

In addition to the many great suggestions already mentioned. I would like to see icons or visual ques in the unit status pane perhaps similar to the fuel status and damage scale that is there currently, except these would be for radar (to show if it is on or off), sonar, weapons tight/free status, altitude scale, icon to show if unit is currently being jammed, or under attack, etc. Like I said doesn't have to be anything fancy just something like the current fuel and damage status visual ques.
User avatar
ExMachina
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:30 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by ExMachina »

This poll is getting big and the focus is getting very broad (not to mention that late additions will get less votes b/c the rest of us have already cast our vote).

Have you guys thought about moving the poll off site so that we can vote by ranking options in order of priority (to us)? I've used SurveyMonkey in the past and it is a great way to manage more complicated polls and to allow voters to rank their preferences. Also, as things are added to the poll, we can go back and alter our votes accordingly.

Just a thought, but it might deconvolute the process a bit.
Stevechase
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:37 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Stevechase »

Ok so this is what I envision with the unit panel helpers:(If I can get it to load the image). For example if the radar is active the radar circle is "yellow' per the image and while the sonar -in this case is blank indicating that it is inactive. The weapons section shows remaining weapons (relative to beginning loadout) by range. As an added benefit it would really be nice to also be able to have the square ESM indicator clickable which would bring up a list of all the detected emissions by this unit. And for that matter have the radar and sonar icons clickable with contact information displayed. This is just a rough idea but you get the point. Sometimes the map can get busy so being able to quickly see and have all the pertinent unit info visually in front of you I think would be very helpful.
Image
Attachments
Commnad.jpg
Commnad.jpg (351.32 KiB) Viewed 947 times
Blas de Lezo
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:07 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by Blas de Lezo »

Hi!, although I have already voted, I would like to add another suggestion: the flight profiles to be followed by the AI, you know those hi-lo-hi, or lo-lo-lo that the DB depict for the different loads out.
User avatar
hellfish6
Posts: 690
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:09 am

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by hellfish6 »

I'd like a hold fire on specific weapon systems on a platform. For example, I was playing a scenario where an enemy RHIB approaches my frigate. I had done a couple of manual engagements with my 76mm, but kept missing. Finally, half out of curiosity to see what the game would do, I let the ship auto target the RHIB. Three Sea Sparrows, an MU 90 torpedo and six bursts of 76mm fire later and the RHIB ceased to exist.

A bit of an overkill... it would have been nice if I could have let the 76mm or CIWS/.50 cals autotarget the RHIB, while the SAMs and torpedoes were weapons tight.
User avatar
ExMachina
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:30 pm

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

Post by ExMachina »

I'd like a hold fire on specific weapon systems on a platform.

That's on the list already [:)] --"Per-weapon manual withhold option (no AI use)"

I'd vote for it if I hadn't already voted
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”