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

Rory Noonan -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 8:25:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cik please add push points if my strike package goes to the target one more time while my SEAD is refuelling i'm going to scream if you're given more than a token force of fighters to play with and they have to go more than a few miles to target this inevitably becomes a big problem. i should not have to watch the whole breadth of my forces to constantly redirect idiots deciding that they're going to push into the SA-10 without SEAD or push over the border without their escort (who knows what they're doing) there needs to be an option to require different elements to group up at RPs or areas before they go to the target. even if this results in the whole package bingoing out it's at least preferable to losing sometimes thousands of points in scenarios because my low-level attackers suicide into the NEZ of some grumble. also SEAD needs to be way more conservative with their ARMs, assigning a flight of wild weasels to SEAD escort and then having them dump every single HARM into the first search radar they get into range of is ridiculous, it's even worse if it's a shilka which can't even threaten their package of standoff bombers. shamal especially is almost unmanageable because of these issues. Hey Cik, I don't know what a 'push point' is, but I think I can help with the HARM salvo issue. You can set the default amount of HARMs to fire in the side doctrine/WRA settings. I think the system default is 'equal to the missile defence number' which can be quite high for SAM sites. Changing it to a more conservative 1 or 2 rnds should fix the problem. As for the first point, Shamal is a big scenario but pretty easily managed using support missions and the strike planner. If it's really giving you grief I suggest posting in The War Room or the general forum, I'd be happy to help you work it out and others would be able to provide a lot of value too.

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 8:37:14 AM)
a push point is where everyone in the strike goes to meet before "pushing" to the target. implementation wise i'd imagine it would be pretty easy; have it be a tab on the strike page (like "prosecution area" etc) that says "push from..." and then if one is set, everyone will move there first, then run a check every so often "is everyone here"? before "pushing" to the target. the whole point of a strike package is the concentration of force against a singular point. if everyone is trickling into the area it's not nearly as effective as a massive simultaneous assault. hell, it's even two birds with one stone: you could easily tell your guys to attack from the E/W/S/N as long as your push point is in that direction. push point is strike 101: meet up with the guys who're escorting you BEFORE YOU RUN INTO THE AIR DEFENSES

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 8:46:40 AM)
also should i know what the strike planner is? is there some untapped well of actual flight planning tools i have not yet discovered? in most cases the autoplanner is okay; for shamal especially though it's not because of the multiple-AAR-per-mission, and the fact that your forces are spread out over 500nm of saudi bases.

Rory Noonan -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 9:03:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cik also should i know what the strike planner is? is there some untapped well of actual flight planning tools i have not yet discovered? in most cases the autoplanner is okay; for shamal especially though it's not because of the multiple-AAR-per-mission, and the fact that your forces are spread out over 500nm of saudi bases. Strike planner is the mission editor settings for strike missions. To do what you describe I assign units to support missions, then when they're all in place and tanked up I switch them over to the strike missions. There are a whole bunch of AAR settings in the mission planner as well. Anyway, seems like you're pretty angry. I'm not a dev or anything, I'm just trying to help you out.

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 9:16:18 AM)
it's exaggeration for effect, to be fair, i've gotten minor victory twice now, the trick is just making sure you have enough tankers spread out and then setting the correct tempo (making sure your forces are leaving the bases in long enough intervals so that they have fast access to multiple tankers in a row to <-----> from the targets. i do have to spend a lot of time slapping the hands of my aardvarks to prevent them from running in with no cover though, which i'd prefer not to do. thanks for the tip about the HARMs btw, works nicely.

thewood1 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 11:37:56 AM)
Since your new to the forum, I would suggest a slightly less passive-aggressive tone. You'll find people a lot more willing to help those who try to help themselves and those who don't come across as dickish. I would also suggest that someone relatively new to the game go through the new player thread in the top section of the forum. It has manual, manual addendum, tutorial videos, etc. For example, instead of coming in and trying to lecture in a feature request thread, how about asking a question in the main thread or strategy thread. A lot more people are looking around there for suggestions and you'll get more experienced players seeing the comment and offering help. If you had actually read around the forums a little, you would see that the devs are working on advanced strike (TOT) planning with form up and ingress locations. But hey, why do that when you can fly off the handle and drop 3-4 posts in a off-topic thread?

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 12:21:33 PM)
Pretty sure Rag does have something like a push point in mind in the design of his flight planner so I don't think you'll be that disappointed.[:D] Mike

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/5/2016 8:04:52 PM)
so it is in the works then? neat. like i said, for the most part it's manageable without it but the really strike heavy scenarios could use a few extra options. looking forward to it.[:)]

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/6/2016 12:00:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cik so it is in the works then? neat. like i said, for the most part it's manageable without it but the really strike heavy scenarios could use a few extra options. looking forward to it.[:)] Sure is. It's very complex but the samurai is working on it so think it will be great. We want this too! Mike

Gneckes -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 12:42:30 AM)
Can you give us a rough idea of when we can expect the good stuff?

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 12:57:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cik implementation wise i'd imagine it would be pretty easy; Okay.

thewood1 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 1:27:49 PM)
Oh brother...

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 3:29:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gneckes Can you give us a rough idea of when we can expect the good stuff? Early in the new year I think. This is my gut call but nothing official. We are very very busy right now on the pro side. Thanks! Mike

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 11:10:08 PM)
hey, i meant "conceptually" obviously i have no idea what CMANO looks like under the hood, but there are already systems in place for this sort of behavior; it seems to me that the patrol code could be co-opted mostly to provide push point behavior "go here and fly loiter throttle inside this box until this precondition is met then move onwards at cruise to attack" there's also already handy tabs for patrol / support that mimic behaviors you'd need for push points(?) so okay not easy but not to the point where inventing some entirely new system is necessary. there are a few ways to do it though, and some would require more effort i'm sure. anyway, i'm just happy it's in the works.

Gneckes -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/7/2016 11:15:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mikmyk quote: ORIGINAL: Gneckes Can you give us a rough idea of when we can expect the good stuff? Early in the new year I think. This is my gut call but nothing official. We are very very busy right now on the pro side. Thanks! Mike Awesome! Sounds like quite the birthday present for me! :)

tjhkkr -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/12/2016 9:59:22 PM)
Thank you for the TIMER in the Lua/Event editor. It makes weather a whole lot easier.[sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif][8D][:)]

orca -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (10/19/2016 2:47:32 AM)
several requests: 1- map display option to choose between decimals and degrees for lat/long 2- option to switch from unit to group view for a single group (instead of all or one). Possibly hotkey shift V 3- more specific options for "applies to" in regard to no-navigation or exclusion zones. Instead just aircraft, ships, subs, and land units as options--> expand to options similar to event triggers to allow for more control (ie allow my fighter to enter an area but not my MPA). 4- add "any" to options in selecting target side and target type in event triggers 5- ability to select units as triggers that are at ports, bases, or on ships. Currently these units don't show up as options for selecting triggers. 6- add lua script or option in editor to make a certain action occur a specific time from it's associated trigger. Maybe there is a lua script to allow this and if so please let me know what it is. None of these are super high priority but I think they would be very helpful and thanks for considering. And thanks again to all the devs for everything- we don't say this enough.

miller7219 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/5/2016 4:23:33 AM)
I like to see an "Identify" order added to the right-click task window. It would be nice to not have to micro-manage altitude and intercept course\speed for identify tasks.

Dimitris -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/5/2016 8:14:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: miller7219 I like to see an "Identify" order added to the right-click task window. It would be nice to not have to micro-manage altitude and intercept course\speed for identify tasks. You can do this easily even now. Order your unit to intercept the unknown contact (auto attack) and set its WCS setting to "hold" (do not fire expect in self-defence).

miller7219 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/6/2016 6:58:13 PM)
Well, I guess you can do that, but it seems the yellow contacts you select for auto attack are then marked as hostile (red). I'd like to be able to (with a friendly unit selected) right click on a yellow contact and have a task box with the option to "Identify" as an option, where once selected the selected friendly unit will now alter course/altitude and move in to perform recon/ID. Or, right click on a friendly unit and have "Identify" as an option and once selected you then click on a yellow contact somewhere on map. Or, have the ability to create a "Recon" type specific mission from the mission editor, where a rally area is selected with a ref point(s) and a then max radius to perform recon/ID from the rally point. I'm not very advanced with all the check boxes and options and stuff. All above may already be possible in some fashion. If so please point me in the right direction. I just want to easily be able to easily tell certain assets to be designated for recon/ID duty and let the AI take it from there.

Grazyn -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/7/2016 10:33:46 PM)
AAW patrol with prosecution zone will make your aircrafts automatically identify any unknown contact that enters the zone. The "rally" area is the patrol zone, the "max radius" is the prosecution zone. Assuming all your RoEs are "on hold", if you manually tag a contact as unfriendly, your units will behave like it's hostile (getting real close and personal to it) but they won't fire.

DROregon -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/10/2016 3:30:43 AM)
Request: 2x Time Compression. A compression between real-time and 5x I think would help my game. I'm too slow to react at 5x and I'm too impatient at real-time.

daveoreno -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/11/2016 12:57:23 PM)
I vote for the Option to enable a message when a vehicle reaches a specific waypoint

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/13/2016 11:41:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: daveoreno@hotmail.com I vote for the Option to enable a message when a vehicle reaches a specific waypoint You can do this using the event editor on it own or lua. The event editor action would be message and the trigger would be enters an area. Thanks! Mike

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/13/2016 11:42:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DROregon Request: 2x Time Compression. A compression between real-time and 5x I think would help my game. I'm too slow to react at 5x and I'm too impatient at real-time. Look into the using the pop up messages to stop the game for important stuff. This should help. Thanks! Mike

ColonelMolerat -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/13/2016 11:48:40 AM)
Bingo fuel calculations currently don't take into account no-navigation zones (they seem to be measured as the crow flies) - so if a unit hits bingo fuel and on its way home has to go around a no-nav zone, it might run out of fuel and crash. I've lost quite a few units before realising what was going on... Perhaps bingo fuel limits could take these into account? (Though I suspect that kind of thing is hellishly complex, judging from this - http://www.warfaresims.com/?p=4243 - in which case I'll just keep on tweaking joker fuel settings)

mikmykWS -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/13/2016 12:13:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ColonelMolerat Bingo fuel calculations currently don't take into account no-navigation zones (they seem to be measured as the crow flies) - so if a unit hits bingo fuel and on its way home has to go around a no-nav zone, it might run out of fuel and crash. I've lost quite a few units before realising what was going on... Perhaps bingo fuel limits could take these into account? (Though I suspect that kind of thing is hellishly complex, judging from this - http://www.warfaresims.com/?p=4243 - in which case I'll just keep on tweaking joker fuel settings) It checks periodically but yeah its very complex. We'll continue to do and try our best. Mike

leo321 -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/14/2016 7:07:58 PM)
First dream, is management of Carrier and airfield it'll be amazing(imagem add sample) Segcond dream, it'll be load a Cargo like c-5, c17. And Transport ammo to another base. This on my opinion gonna be a booster in the game. [image]local://upfiles/53738/3C12F26EE1EB49D688EA5F372AA98E32.jpg[/image]

Gneckes -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/14/2016 7:15:09 PM)
Personally, I'm most excited for the the advanced strike planner, and the simulation of comms, COMINT, encryption etc.

Cik -> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features (11/14/2016 11:43:49 PM)
advanced strike will be neat if it includes all of the things i think it's probably going to include. maybe i'm hyping it up to be more than it is but hoping for: push points / RV points weapon time-on-target rolex more advanced escort behavior (in front, behind, to the side, etc) more precise tanker control (pre-ingress / post-ingress refuel, throttling the percentile refuel parameter) RP based EMCON points(?) more advanced SEAD target selection behavior(?) i'm not sure this is actually faulty, but it seems like they shoot too much at threats that will never become a problem for their strike. it might be good to have a setting that says "SEAD escort only engages SAMs currently or likely to engage their package" as it is now it seems like they just fire off everything they have the second they come in range of the first search radar on the way in. makes SEAD escorts marginal, better to use strikes with "attack only targets in the target list" selected. probably the most important though is push, just to get everyone in the same neighborhood before everybody goes into the target. you can get around it now with micro and by using much smaller packages with more limited missions, but it'd still be great. the rest are luxury but would be nice. anyway, i'm drooling for it because i really enjoy the heavy air scenarios like desert storm and that russian one (iron hand?)

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

0.96875