RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features

RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (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

Stevechase -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/19/2013 1:37:58 AM)
Is there a better way to conduct the poll. Could we take off the current leaders and reset everything else to 0 and vote again.

miller7219 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/19/2013 7:04:32 AM)
quote: One of the things that always hacked me off about Harpoon Commander's Edition and H3 ANW's development was that they seemed to always put too much priority on adding new features all the time instead of fixing/improving upon what was already there. I'd rather have less, but have it work correctly and efficiently. But in the end, the various incarnations bearing the Harpoon name all could claim the got bigger and grew more and more features, but none really got better in my opinion, just bigger with more things broken. I'll give you an example, Harpoon Commander's Ultimate Edition's naval gunnery model is completely broken as of the current 2009.097 "patch" (and has been for several years). It worked as designed once upon a time, but it got broken somewhere around the port from DOS to windows and multiple license owners and then got lost to all the "let's add new features" mentality. Yes, I'm talking about something as essential as naval gunnery is broken. Command, please don't fall victim to the same mentality. Fix/improve upon what already is and its shortcomings, and then add new features after please and thank you [:)] It's not broken, but in my opinion the shortcomings to Command currently are the UI/Player control aspects and the AI could use some development. Fix the stability bugs, and then put all efforts into improving the UI/Player control and developing the AI. All else can wait until the base is solid.

miller7219 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/19/2013 7:06:18 AM)
I agree. Can a poll be created that allows participants to vote from 1-5 in order of their top issues? It's hard to pick just 1!

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/23/2013 5:56:22 PM)
Removed the DB-hyperlinks as this is already being implemented. If you voted for it feel free to re-cast your vote!

BKLANDIN -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/24/2013 5:41:03 PM)
This one item is big, thanks for the update.

riflebrigade -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/26/2013 7:49:11 AM)
Would it be possible to include a button to show maximum range rings for aircraft with current fuel load? Preferably for cruise speed at current and most economical height. To me the major games play features nominated are: - 1. Crew proficiency (quality and training) is a major factor and can have a large effect on weapon effectiveness. 2. Refine air combat evasion limitations (reduced agility) would provide a much more realistic game. This could also be influenced by the Crew Proficiency rating.

Agathosdaimon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/28/2013 1:28:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: riflebrigade Would it be possible to include a button to show maximum range rings for aircraft with current fuel load? Preferably for cruise speed at current and most economical height. To me the major games play features nominated are: - 1. Crew proficiency (quality and training) is a major factor and can have a large effect on weapon effectiveness. 2. Refine air combat evasion limitations (reduced agility) would provide a much more realistic game. This could also be influenced by the Crew Proficiency rating. Yes to all this - definitely need range rings or something - i cant find range information anywhere and i find it important to know how far i send out aircraft so to speak - which mean all the difference in some scenarios too perhaps crew proficiency could be an optional setting -and could be randomised to a varying degree, or set as per the designed scenario

ExMachina -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/28/2013 3:43:17 PM)
quote: i cant find range information anywhere and i find it important to know how far i send out aircraft so to speak Range info is already displayed in the sidebar for the selected unit (listed under remaining fuel).

Tomcat84 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/28/2013 4:33:48 PM)
Well, really it's only endurance that it shows, right? So you have to do the calculation yourself. (e.g. 3 hrs 23 remaining at 480 kts = 3.383*480 = 1624 nm)

ExMachina -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/28/2013 4:48:57 PM)
Oh. You might be right [:o] So it should be a trivial thing to have the game do that calculation for us. That would be a good addition(though I've obviously never felt the need to use it [;)])

Agathosdaimon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 9:05:03 AM)
Well it might depend on the scenario, but i would like to have easy way to know this before an aircraft has been launched altogether, as the example above is only for aircraft in flight already, where their fuel is listed. I had thought that this would be info in the db that i could check but there is nothing there either

michaelm75au -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 10:07:39 AM)
One think I missed from Harpoon was the ability to set when and for how long active/passive sensors could be used for while unit was moving. eg radar passive - active for 2 minutes every 30 minutes +/- 20% (can't recall exact settings but hopefully you get the drift). Having to do this manually for lots of platforms would be a pain.

deepdive -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 12:41:00 PM)
When i bought this game, i should have been warned that; "this game is under development, feel free to join as Beta tester".

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 12:58:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deepdive When i bought this game, i should have been warned that; "this game is under development, feel free to join as Beta tester". Such a 'warning' would have been unfair. Please read here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3449564 Thanks!

deepdive -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 5:31:50 PM)
Sorry, i am just frustrated, been playing Harpoonll/lll Admirals edition since -95, was even more frustrated with those, so i am disappointed that some bad "things" shows up in this game. especialy fligth altitude and weapon rec. I do however understand how much effort you all have done to make this release happen, and i appreciate that.[&o] I hope that my boxed version is more stable and that it include B451. Bj�rn

Agathosdaimon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 6:15:57 PM)
also the option to have intermittent radar - like in Harpoon and numerous other such sims - that is something that real world systems can do yes?

snowburn -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 7:06:25 PM)
i would like to add an expanded AAR, as seen on my thread: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3449370

thewood1 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/29/2013 7:44:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Agathosdaimon also the option to have intermittent radar - like in Harpoon and numerous other such sims - that is something that real world systems can do yes? Yes, and you can do it in Command. It is just manual, the same way real life is if you have micro-manage.

Agathosdaimon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/30/2013 1:17:18 AM)
I think that would make for a very difficult process of constantly zoom in and out back and forth to switch radars on an off - a prohibitve task if one wanted to do this for many units. But perhaps there is no advantage to doing it? I dont think at all that this wonderful sim is in beta still. Its a fully fledged game and one that i am engrossed by, and it is a testament to how enormous its scope is that all the possbilities and sysytems being simulated can still throw up hitherto unseen bugs. It is good that this is being improved. One can already find much to enjoy and i think the editor has many intriguing possibilities that stimulate problem solving and logic, What i would just like to see included in the next update is the fix to the ai on my side automatically switching on radar when i go into mission editor and doing so before i can even assign units. It shouldnt be overriding the parent emcon on its own at that point at all

thewood1 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/30/2013 11:57:39 AM)
Oh, I agree it is difficult in large scenarios to manage sensors with no ability to do anything but on or off. I am just saying it can be done. In fact, my fleets are much stealthier in Command than in Harpoon because I am too lazy to micro-manage their sensors.

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/3/2013 9:39:48 AM)
Removed proficiency levels as they were added in Build 455. If you voted this you can now re-cast your vote!

EagleMountainDK -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/3/2013 10:38:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sunburn Removed proficiency levels as they were added in Build 455. If you voted this you can now re-cast your vote! This is indeed good news [:)]

snowburn -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/4/2013 6:20:50 PM)
[suggestion] DB Viewer should have DB name and version on window's title.

ComDev -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/5/2013 4:00:34 AM)
Suggestion registered! Thanks [8D]

Pii -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/5/2013 3:24:06 PM)
quote: It's not broken, but in my opinion the shortcomings to Command currently are the UI/Player control aspects and the AI could use some development. Fix the stability bugs, and then put all efforts into improving the UI/Player control and developing the AI. All else can wait until the base is solid. Yes fix what you have now before worrying about adding more.

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/5/2013 4:43:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pii Yes fix what you have now before worrying about adding more. Pii are you the one that posted this: quote: Save your money its a bug filled mess IMO. I have no experience in Naval warfare yet I can and have beat every mission I've played (when it didn't freeze on me) that right there tells me something isn't right. All you have to do is give your units a mission and they go happily along finding and killing everything for you. BORING! On this YT page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_M9HUMG1oU ...?

JCR -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/6/2013 11:30:35 AM)
Hi, a feature I would like would be a doctrine set for surface AAW ships like: AAW behavior: - self defense only - engage missiles and incoming aircraft - engage everything It is utterly frustrating to have my air defense vessels waste their SAMs on peripheral targets in their engagement zone that could just as easily been handled by a fighter. Otherwise I'd like the implementation of day/night limitations for aircraft, as I like old school scens best.

orca -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/6/2013 7:10:40 PM)
It's been requested on other posts before but my number 1 feature request is: SENSOR INFO It's invaluable having the ship, aircraft, weapon, etc info available at the click of a mouse. But extremely frustrating not having similar info on sensors. Is there a reason that this data is not made available for the user?

Stevechase -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/7/2013 1:22:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: orca It's been requested on other posts before but my number 1 feature request is: SENSOR INFO It's invaluable having the ship, aircraft, weapon, etc info available at the click of a mouse. But extremely frustrating not having similar info on sensors. Is there a reason that this data is not made available for the user? +1

Stevechase -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/7/2013 1:31:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stevechase quote: ORIGINAL: orca It's been requested on other posts before but my number 1 feature request is: SENSOR INFO It's invaluable having the ship, aircraft, weapon, etc info available at the click of a mouse. But extremely frustrating not having similar info on sensors. Is there a reason that this data is not made available for the user? +1 +1 see my thread post: "Select-able Contact emissions info feature" I'm pretty sure the devs know its importance more than the rest of us and have some plans to enhance the sensor info, but I know they are getting bookoo other requests, but I agree that this would be one the most game enhancing useful features.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

1.078125