RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests

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 - ScenEdit 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 >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

[Poll]

RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests

See RPs and/or No nav zones and/or exclusion zones from all sides

1% (4)

Local weather fronts (non-global weather)

36% (92)

EE trigger: ID status change on contact

0% (0)

AND / OR operators on event conditions

21% (54)

Dynamic campaign (events on one scen affect the next)

24% (61)

Add Magazine

1% (4)

Lua: Join a unit to a group

0% (2)

Lua: Compel a ship to UNREP

0% (1)

UI windows for editing magazines and datalinks (like wpns / sensors)

4% (12)

Add filter-options to the "Teleport_Unit" event action

0% (0)

Make nav/exclusion zones optionally applicable to specific units

1% (4)

Persist sprint and drift settings to .inst file

0% (2)

Lua: Specify unit as escort on a mission

1% (4)

Lua: Specify desired unit speed/throttle

1% (3)

Option to scrub a No-Nav Zone if the side is human-played

0% (0)

Wrecked ships

3% (8)

Total Votes : 251

(last vote on : 2/11/2022 6:45:03 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/20/2016 3:31:11 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DeSade

I would love to be able to designate landed aircrafts as strike mission targets. Workaround (launching them, assigning and landing) is very cumbersome when scenario is in advanced stage. Maybe assigning targets for mission from OOB screen?

As an option/alternative, possibility to define targets for strike missions by type/subtype rather then actual units.

This is a work in progress

_____________________________

(in reply to DeSade)

Post #: 151

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/25/2016 8:38:41 PM

iborg

Posts: 23
Joined: 2/22/2016
Status: offline

I voted for AND/OR operators for triggers in the Event Editor.
I have another suggestion : being able to specify a set number of units in "unit enters zone/ is destroyed/damaged" triggers. For example, setting a trigger so that when X number of a unit type are destroyed, stuff happens. The most obvious use would be to tailor AI side behavior according to losses.

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 152

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 3/10/2016 3:57:29 AM

dsatya

Posts: 4
Joined: 2/28/2016
From: Indonesia
Status: offline

hello..

will it be possible to change damage status of the unit through lua? As an example, giving status "destroyed" or "damaged" to some sensors of a ship, while overall damage of the ship itself is only 20 or 30 %.
I think these would be a good addition to the scenedit scripts, lets say when you want to have "controlled" damage status of a ship caused by some explosions (nuclear maybe) in the middle of running scenario.

Thanks !

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 153

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 3/10/2016 7:17:11 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

We've added "Doctrine option: Ignore Bingo fuel." in v1.11 so removed from list

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to dsatya)

Post #: 154

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 3/10/2016 3:42:34 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

We've added "Doctrine option: Ignore Bingo fuel." in v1.11 so removed from list

Wow! With the tanker mission improvements this will do a lot to deconflict long-range air operations (if config'd correctly by the scen editor and/or player). Nothing worse than rolling onto a target at the bleeding edge of Bingo to have your a/c RTB because of fuel state (especially when you have tankers waiting for them on egress). This is awesome!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 155

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 3/31/2016 1:06:41 PM

Dysta

Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

quote:

ORIGINAL: emsoy

We've added "Doctrine option: Ignore Bingo fuel." in v1.11 so removed from list

Wow! With the tanker mission improvements this will do a lot to deconflict long-range air operations (if config'd correctly by the scen editor and/or player). Nothing worse than rolling onto a target at the bleeding edge of Bingo to have your a/c RTB because of fuel state (especially when you have tankers waiting for them on egress). This is awesome!

Or replicating the 3-minutes-war by forcing the jet to gone afterburner full-time and kill as many as it can, before runs out and crash.

_____________________________

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 156

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 4/13/2016 1:54:11 AM

orca

Posts: 501
Joined: 11/6/2013
Status: offline

It would be very helpful if no-nav and exclusion zones could be made to apply to specific unit target type, subtype, class and specific unit (similar to event trigger options) instead of just aircraft, ships, subs, or land units. This would allow me to keep certain units (ie MPA) out of a certain area but allow other units (ie strike aircraft, subs, etc) to not be effected.

Unless maybe there is a way to currently easily do this. The way I do it is to create a separate friendly side containing only the units I want to keep out of certain areas and create no-nav zones for that side. Not ideal but a workaround. Do others know of different ways to keep specific but not all units our of certain areas?

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 157

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/8/2016 7:50:01 AM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

Can the interlock on adding facilities to water be removed when importing from an installation file? I'm trying to reimport some SCS insts I built and it looks like it will only load the ones that are on land masses (very few). I don't see big issues with this, since I don't think the elevation/terrain model is going to change soon, and if it's in an installation file, the author wanted the facility there for some reason.

(in reply to orca)

Post #: 158

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/27/2016 7:23:53 PM

Mgellis

Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline

An idea...

Would it be possible to update the Event Editor so that some of the more common lua actions are now automated/menu-based (e.g., the way teleporting a unit is) rather than code-based? Things like changing the weather, adding units, having an explosion go off at a certain location, deleting units, killing units, and anything else where it might make sense to set things up this way. You could still use the lua code if you wanted, but there would also be separate items in the Action menu that would let people do it without coding. It would just make things a little easier for scenario designers who, like myself, are a little on the coding-impaired side.

Thanks for considering this.

(in reply to ExNusquam)

Post #: 159

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/28/2016 1:16:16 AM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

An idea...

Would it be possible to update the Event Editor so that some of the more common lua actions are now automated/menu-based (e.g., the way teleporting a unit is) rather than code-based? Things like changing the weather, adding units, having an explosion go off at a certain location, deleting units, killing units, and anything else where it might make sense to set things up this way. You could still use the lua code if you wanted, but there would also be separate items in the Action menu that would let people do it without coding. It would just make things a little easier for scenario designers who, like myself, are a little on the coding-impaired side.

Thanks for considering this.

The lua console has buttons. You just pick the script from the drop down, add it and then fill in the blanks.

Adding a complete module to help you write this would be a large task and would defeat the point.

If you need help ask on the q and a site. Lot of guys that like a coding challenge there.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Mgellis)

Post #: 160

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/28/2016 1:38:22 AM

Kitchens Sink

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/4/2014
Status: offline

I'm not sure if this is the correct thread for this request, but I would like to see an option to "Scrub Event if Side is Human", similar to the "Scrub Mission if Side is Human" setting currently in the game for missions. This would keep some or all AI-Side Event Firings from showing up in the Message Log. I realize this can be done by Players by turning off Events in the Game Options area, but I think it's handy for scenarios where players might forget to do this.

Thanks!

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 161

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/30/2016 12:44:28 AM

USSInchon

Posts: 40
Joined: 2/17/2014
Status: offline

Would it be possible to make the "ScenEdit_SetLoadout" function able to change a loadout even if the aircraft is still in the process of being readied? At present it comes back with "Aircraft is not parked, cannot change loadout!" This would make it easier to simulate maintenance periods or aircraft breaking down.

(in reply to Kitchens Sink)

Post #: 162

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 6/8/2016 5:06:40 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USSInchon

Would it be possible to make the "ScenEdit_SetLoadout" function able to change a loadout even if the aircraft is still in the process of being readied? At present it comes back with "Aircraft is not parked, cannot change loadout!" This would make it easier to simulate maintenance periods or aircraft breaking down.

+1

_____________________________

(in reply to USSInchon)

Post #: 163

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 6/8/2016 5:12:37 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

Being able to re-arrange several reference points at once in the Event Editor or while setting up on No-Nav zones would literally be a game changer.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 164

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 7/5/2016 7:15:19 PM

acidtekno

Posts: 10
Joined: 5/14/2015
From: Poland
Status: offline

LUA: 'wait(n seconds)' function that could be used without blocking the main thread.

Ksawery

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 165

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 8/27/2016 9:33:05 PM

orca

Posts: 501
Joined: 11/6/2013
Status: offline

Can the option for unlimited ammo at bases be either: yes, no, or yes but only at selected bases.

This allows more options for scenarios when base ammo details are important in some locations but would be much easier for scenario designer to have unlimited ammo at others.

(in reply to acidtekno)

Post #: 166

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 9/21/2016 7:16:36 PM

orca

Posts: 501
Joined: 11/6/2013
Status: offline

Can the map be updated to include the reclaimed SCS islands? This has been discussed before but am reposting as it's extremely important in any SCS scenario. There is a work around by placing units on land somewhere else and the moving to the appropriate position on "water". But it's not ideal for several reasons including normally mobile land units can't move correctly on "water" which limits mobile radars and missiles.

There is much information now on these islands. Google maps shows many of these including the airfields on Woody, Subi, Mischief, and Fiery Cross. When you look you realize how big they are. You can even see Flankers parked on Woody and many large ships docked at all.

Here are a few interesting links:
http://warontherocks.com/2016/09/chinas-artificial-islands-are-bigger-and-a-bigger-deal-than-you-think/
https://amti.csis.org/island-tracker/

(in reply to orca)

Post #: 167

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 9/21/2016 7:22:48 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: orca

Can the map be updated to include the reclaimed SCS islands? This has been discussed before but am reposting as it's extremely important in any SCS scenario. There is a work around by placing units on land somewhere else and the moving to the appropriate position on "water". But it's not ideal for several reasons including normally mobile land units can't move correctly on "water" which limits mobile radars and missiles.

There is much information now on these islands. Google maps shows many of these including the airfields on Woody, Subi, Mischief, and Fiery Cross. When you look you realize how big they are. You can even see Flankers parked on Woody and many large ships docked at all.

Here are a few interesting links:
http://warontherocks.com/2016/09/chinas-artificial-islands-are-bigger-and-a-bigger-deal-than-you-think/
https://amti.csis.org/island-tracker/

Is on our list. Probably best to see what things look like after all the terraforming going on in real life. This is a very complex task so unfortunately its not a quick add. Its on the list though already.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to orca)

Post #: 168

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/20/2017 5:24:13 AM

Rory Noonan

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline

I'd love to have the following lua commands:

add a side
delete a side

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 169

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/20/2017 8:13:40 AM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0

quote:

ORIGINAL: USSInchon

Would it be possible to make the "ScenEdit_SetLoadout" function able to change a loadout even if the aircraft is still in the process of being readied? At present it comes back with "Aircraft is not parked, cannot change loadout!" This would make it easier to simulate maintenance periods or aircraft breaking down.

+1

1.11.SR7 - ScenEdit_SetLoadout() allows READYING a/c to be updated also

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 170

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/20/2017 8:21:35 AM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitchens Sink

I'm not sure if this is the correct thread for this request, but I would like to see an option to "Scrub Event if Side is Human", similar to the "Scrub Mission if Side is Human" setting currently in the game for missions. This would keep some or all AI-Side Event Firings from showing up in the Message Log. I realize this can be done by Players by turning off Events in the Game Options area, but I think it's handy for scenarios where players might forget to do this.

Thanks!

In 1.11.SR7: Added option on Event that can controls logging to the game log; on by default, but useful for an event that fires quite often

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Kitchens Sink)

Post #: 171

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/20/2017 8:24:05 AM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dsatya

hello..

will it be possible to change damage status of the unit through lua? As an example, giving status "destroyed" or "damaged" to some sensors of a ship, while overall damage of the ship itself is only 20 or 30 %.
I think these would be a good addition to the scenedit scripts, lets say when you want to have "controlled" damage status of a ship caused by some explosions (nuclear maybe) in the middle of running scenario.

Thanks !

In 1.11.SR7: added new function ScenEdit_SetUnitDamage(table)

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to dsatya)

Post #: 172

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 2/26/2017 6:31:53 PM

orca

Posts: 501
Joined: 11/6/2013
Status: offline

Would be nice to have a unit leaves area trigger.

Also is it possible to make the text size in the event editor stay changed every time I reopen it? Currently it always defaults to 8 which is small on my monitor.

thanks

< Message edited by orca -- 2/26/2017 6:35:23 PM >

(in reply to michaelm75au)

Post #: 173

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 3/25/2017 4:35:23 PM

Rommel76

Posts: 78
Joined: 12/5/2014
Status: offline

I vote for local weather fronts (non-global weather).

(in reply to orca)

Post #: 174

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/8/2017 11:05:50 PM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

This is a very small request - can the "Change Database" menu be rearanged so that the most current builds of DB3k and CWDB (and soon WW2DB) are at the top of the list? There are now so many versions of DB3K you have to click at the bottom to scroll down.

(in reply to Rommel76)

Post #: 175

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/9/2017 11:57:35 AM

Zaslon

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rommel76

I vote for local weather fronts (non-global weather).

Defined with points, like Missions for example.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

This is a very small request - can the "Change Database" menu be rearanged so that the most current builds of DB3k and CWDB (and soon WW2DB) are at the top of the list? There are now so many versions of DB3K you have to click at the bottom to scroll down.

I agree.

_____________________________

Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to Rommel76)

Post #: 176

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/28/2017 8:14:08 PM

Norm49

Posts: 55
Joined: 6/5/2015
Status: offline

Me I went to be able to transfer ammunition with cargo plane and helicopter.

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 177

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/28/2017 9:54:01 PM

ParachuteProne

Posts: 207
Joined: 8/2/2004
Status: offline

Please add a more advanced or at least more realistic ground combat model so ground forces cannot drive through each others area of control and have a realistic attrition rate.

Although I would vote for above first I would like to second SAR mentioned earlier. If a ship or plane goes down a number of rescuable targets may be left to recover.

(in reply to Norm49)

Post #: 178

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 5/31/2017 8:36:55 PM

ParachuteProne

Posts: 207
Joined: 8/2/2004
Status: offline

Please add expanded /more detailed /realistic ground combat

(in reply to navwarcol)

Post #: 179

RE: RUNNING POLL - ScenEdit requests - 7/28/2017 11:02:33 PM

fortyporkpies

Posts: 18
Joined: 4/8/2009
From: Washington DC
Status: offline

Please oh please add a countdown timer. Both at the lua level, as Acidtekno mentioned earlier, a "wait(duration)" function that doesn't jam up other processes (I'd vote for that!), and at the "basic" level too, a [Time Elapsed] trigger selectable in the "create new trigger" dropdown menu. Hope that makes sense

_____________________________

(in reply to acidtekno)

Post #: 180