RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series

[Poll]

RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]


Downed pilots / CSAR (without using the EE)
  13% (72)
Improve weather modelling (local fronts etc.)
  12% (66)
Dedicated sensor page on DB viewer
  3% (21)
Intermittent sensor settings
  5% (28)
TOT planner/Advance Strike Planner
  29% (155)
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% (26)
Real-time MP
  9% (48)
Mid-flight mechanical breakdowns on aircraft
  0% (1)
Expand space ops (Shuttle / Skylab, armed sats etc.)
  1% (8)
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% (3)
Aircraft Maintenence and Support Crew Modeling
  1% (10)
Player's Alarm Clock
  0% (1)
Collateral Damage Zone (CDZ)
  0% (2)
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% (2)
Filtering and search added to add cargo dialog
  0% (0)
Ship Towing
  0% (4)


Total Votes : 533
(last vote on : 2/3/2022 4:12:52 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message

Marder -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/6/2016 7:47:13 AM)

Has the following ever wanted?
I would love the OOB window have the ability to sort by unit type. (e.g. list all flyable objects, list all ships etc.)
Also Different search criteria would help me to keep track of my units in great scenarios better.



Rory Noonan -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/6/2016 10:55:17 AM)

On the topic of the OOB window, is it possible to set the default 'nesting' option to closed? Scrolling through miles and miles of units to hide all of the units associated with a large airbase takes a long time and needs to be done every time the window is opened.



zaytsev -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/16/2016 7:51:06 PM)

I have two more/less simple requests, just visuals:

1. Truncate long unit names into two rows.
2. Make cursor status box display (left/right) side forced selectable , as it is, it overlays unit name more often

Thanx



zaytsev -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/20/2016 3:34:28 PM)

Ok, one more :)

For unit in the group, eg. ships, manually plotted course for specific unit(s) in the group, gets saved in save game.

On loading eg. autosave, if I have altered course for some unit in the group, it is always reset on loading autosave.
I guees this is by design, it always have been so.
But can you add this to the list, if no objections...

This is the problem description (big picture),
-in a mission there is a mine field , and I have managed to create, one pass small narrow passage, by two side by side MCM ships, through it
-now I need to transfer whole fleet through that narrow channel
-so, not to break default formation, I have manually plotted course for every ship except "LEAD" through that passage, in unit view
-they are slow and didn't pass through that passage in few sessions
-now, I have to plot course again and again for every ship on every load, because that manually plotted course is not saved , and it gets reset
by default group course and formation

So is it possible that you can implement this, or is it problematic, for some reason, so it is left as it is from the beginning?

Thanks











DWReese -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/28/2016 3:04:00 AM)

If a group of planes on the GROUP SCREEN are all being jammed it won't indicate that by having "JAMMED" next to the group. You can tell that they really are all being jammed because if you go to the UNIT SCREEN it individually indicates "JAMMED" next to each one. If possible, could "JAMMED" be placed on the GROUP SCREEN, too, to indicate that the group is being jammed?

Thanks

Doug



Zaslon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - OOB search criteria (4/28/2016 4:14:38 PM)

Customize any platform with sensors and weapons is great, fantastic, but ATM is only possible create in the sea (ship/submarine) or in the air (aircrafts).

I think that can be great if these customizations can be saved in Delta.ini and the database can read this customizations in a special tab for fill piers and air bases with this customized units.

For example, I created a MiG-23MLK with the weapons system from MiG-29 Fulcrum-A but I want to fill my airbases with this customization unit in one or some scenarios and ATM I cannot do that.

This customization units must be outside the DB...like now, with a delta template...but would be accesible in a special tab for any scenario when u are adding a unit.

Thanks.



jimcarravall -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (4/28/2016 5:49:52 PM)

Stop refueling operations at airbases when ground fuel storage capacity is destroyed.



Gerbilskij -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (4/29/2016 4:36:24 PM)

DISREGARD

As of now, the carrier capability is just a binary option, either an aircraft is carrier capable or not and either a ship is able to lunch/recover aircrafts - Carrier (Aviation Ship) - or not.

I propose to add a more realistic representation of the actual capabilities of each ship/aircraft, according (tentative) to four simple categories:
(1) VTOL only
(2) STOVL
(3) Sky Jump and arrested recovery
(4) CATOBAR.



Mgellis -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/1/2016 3:33:39 AM)

A request...

Would it be possible to have a map overlay that shows territorial waters and another one that shows EEZ boundaries? (There is a .kmz file for Google Earth that shows EEZs, although I have no idea how to convert that into a map overlay.)

There are a LOT of scenarios where being able to know this would be extremely useful. Thanks!



ccruler -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/1/2016 1:48:26 PM)

I understand there is probably never going to be the option of making our own units (making up our own ships, aircraft, etc.) but a feature I would like to see is the ability to create your own aircraft loadouts. Currently you can change out weapons via the editor while in the air, but once it lands, it will no longer have that type of loadout available. I'd like to make my own customized loadouts in some scenarios which would not need to be set through the editor over and over and over again.



FoxZz -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/3/2016 2:27:03 PM)

Linked to the "missile range and altitude thread", I want to propose an enhancement of the current missile model/ weapon energy stuff.

Basically, max range and PH of a missile are linked to several factors like target behaviour, missile onboard fuel, aerodynamics, flying profile and seeker/INS performances, but also launch platform altitude and speed. All is about energy managment, everything that will impact the missile energy will impact its final range and PH.

Currently, the target behaviour and the missile performances are pretty well modelled, however altitude and launch platform speed impact on missile kinematics are only partially modelled and this make this aspect of the game significantly different from reality. Indeed, fired at low altitude, where the air is more dense, missiles max range can be reducced as much as 70%-80% because of the increase drag : http://www.x-plane.org/home/urf/aviation/text/missiles/aam.html. In the same way, a missile/bomb fired at very high speed can have much better range. The height difference between the plane and the target plays also a role.

That's why I'm proposing several solutions :

- 1) Change the Missile "fuel pts/sec" value for the different altitudes bands. The lower bands would make the missile spend a much bigger part of its "fuel/energy" than the higher bands, in the same manner than aircraft spending more fuel at lower altitudes.
The surface systems like the SAM batteries would also be affected by this system but their fuel levels should be increased so they can still reach their maximum theorical range against high flying planes while their range against a low flying target would be reducced as it should.

- 2) Each altitude band crossed upwards by the missile on its path to the target would modify the final PH calculation by -5% or -10%, crossing bands downwards could either give a bonus or not change anything. The surface systems like the SAMs batteries would not be affected by this.

- 3) To help the player visualising the huge hit on the theorical missile range linked to altitude, the size of the "pink circle" would change in the different altitude bands, it would represent the max theorical range of the missile on a head on target situated in the altitude band of the launcher plane. The surface systems like the SAMs batteries would not be affected by this.

I've been told that the speed issue will be fixed in coming upgrade, so I will not talk of it.

Thanks for considering this or an alternative solution that the devs thinks will work better for correcting this issue.



Gunner98 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 2:55:58 PM)

A request for the 'Mission Editor', this may already be in the plan but if not please consider.

For Ferry missions, it would add some realism if an air unit could have a different loadout on either leg of a cycling ferry mission. For instance a ferry mission between a land base and an CVN could have a tonnage based load on the way out but a ferry load on the way back to land. Than, when cycling, the AC would pick up the tonnage again and ferry it out to the ship.

Quite a few applications but mostly aesthetic in value.

Tx

B



lowchi -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 3:30:48 PM)

Please consider Ferry missions for ships/subs now that we have boat docking.

Thanks!

Regards Lowchi



USSInchon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 4:03:31 PM)

I would like to see borders for states and provinces on the map.



FoxZz -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 4:45:49 PM)

@USSInchon, you can already, you just have to tick the option Borders and coastlines in the settings I think.

Also, would it be possible to remove the features that have been included from the list, so it's clearer ?



thewood1 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 6:41:47 PM)

I think they already do that.



Vici Supreme -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/8/2016 8:28:08 PM)

A useful addition for the Mission Editor would be Prosecution Areas for Air Intercept Missions. That would be very cool!

Supreme



DWReese -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/9/2016 3:57:25 AM)

I would like to see a more definitive revelation involving the results of Electronic Warfare; at least through the Editor function. This, of course, would involve jamming (and the jamming effects), TALDs, MALDs, OECM mobile units, etc.



deepdive -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/9/2016 12:16:38 PM)

Please reinstate the ability to change midcourse, as you set a course, you can later click midway between two waypoints course settings and drag and create a new waypoint. It should also be possible when creating zones and mission area so you could click, hold and drag between two waypoints to expand area of zones/missions.

Bjørn



USSInchon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/9/2016 9:08:40 PM)

They do have international borders, however I was more interested in domestic borders like the borders of Mississippi and Alabama or Quebec and Ontario.



ComDev -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/9/2016 9:19:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: deepdive

Please reinstate the ability to change midcourse, as you set a course, you can later click midway between two waypoints course settings and drag and create a new waypoint. It should also be possible when creating zones and mission area so you could click, hold and drag between two waypoints to expand area of zones/missions.

Bjørn


Press and hold the Ctrl key when you drag a waypoint, and a new one is created [8D]

The same goes for Ref Points.



Gunner98 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/12/2016 2:02:19 AM)

Was wondering if the 'Clone Unit' function could remember the orientation of piers.

Thanks



Gunner98 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/12/2016 2:04:54 AM)

Am playing around with the longer scenario and it would be useful if the 'Regular Time' trigger had a longer firing time. The longest it will go at the moment is 1 hr. Would it be possible to set longer delays, 1/day, 1/week and multiples of hours and days. Thanks

B



ColonelMolerat -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/13/2016 12:44:02 PM)

Could it be made so that more than one database window can be opened at the same time?

That would make it easier to compare platforms. At the moment, when I have the database window open on one unit, by the time I have found the other unit, and scrolled down to whatever section I'm comparing, I've forgotten the stats on the first. It would be nice to be able to have both windows open so I can see the figures side-by-side.

Edit:

Actually, this would be handy for lots of windows, such as the weapons window - so you can compare which weapons are loaded between platforms - but I imagine there's a nightmare balancing this with UI clutter! The database window would be most useful though.



ColonelMolerat -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/13/2016 1:44:53 PM)

Sorry, something else I'd like to add. I have a feeling I might have seen this mentioned, but I couldn't see it in a search, so sorry if it has been repeated.

Could the 'contact emissions' screen show which unit has detected the emission?

In missions when I'm controlling subs, if my sub is detecting something, I often take that as a sign that the thing might also be detecting the sub! So it'd be useful to know what unit of mine is detecting the emissions, so I can take evasive manoeuvres.

The recent change to the activity log (showing the detecting unit) has been fantastic! I feel guilty to be adding to the feature requests thread so soon after such a big patch. I suppose CMANO could comb your hair when you slept, and there'd still be feature requests for it to tie your laces...

(PS - or am I being naive and the tactic of using detected emissions to know when my subs might be spotted actually useless? So such a feature would be pointless?)



cdcool -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here] (5/13/2016 8:50:11 PM)

Missile impact ETA

Not sure if this came up. Can this be implemented?



cdcool -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/13/2016 9:32:53 PM)

Selecting a log event, takes you to that event on the map.



Gunner98 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/13/2016 10:01:45 PM)

Too help along the longer scenarios, would it be possible to get a new trigger for events:

-Docked for [TIME]. With selections for the pier and the docking ship similar to the options available in other triggers

Thanks



somi83 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/15/2016 12:24:28 PM)

Hi Everybody,
after viewing this thread "Restricting weapon launch on hostile only when it enters a prosecution" something came to my mind. I can't post link for some reason.
in the savegame the f-16 is shooting at su-27 outside patrol/prosecution area because of ROE which is set to "Fire only at contacts that are positively identified as hostile".

What am I trying to suggest maybe we need 4th option in ROE which would be:
"Fire only at contacts that are positively identified as hostile in patrol/prosecution area"

Example: Your aircraft radar picks two bogeys, one is in the patrol/prosecution area and second one isn't, he identifies them as hostile, but only engages one in the patrol/prosecution area.



mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (5/15/2016 3:01:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: somi83

Hi Everybody,
after viewing this thread "Restricting weapon launch on hostile only when it enters a prosecution" something came to my mind. I can't post link for some reason.
in the savegame the f-16 is shooting at su-27 outside patrol/prosecution area because of ROE which is set to "Fire only at contacts that are positively identified as hostile".

What am I trying to suggest maybe we need 4th option in ROE which would be:
"Fire only at contacts that are positively identified as hostile in patrol/prosecution area"

Example: Your aircraft radar picks two bogeys, one is in the patrol/prosecution area and second one isn't, he identifies them as hostile, but only engages one in the patrol/prosecution area.


This is how it should work now.

You'll also notice with strike/intercept missions you can toggle between when to trigger mission based on the posture of the contact.

Mike



Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.421875