quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

I'd really love to have a search tool for the cargo list.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LMychajluk

Instead of just showing the Score, how about a more detailed breakdown once the Scenario is ended? Most of the info is already in Losses/Expenditures, but maybe summarize / compare it?

Something like, by unit types (5th Gen Fighters, 4th Gen Fighters, bombers, DDG, etc...):
"You lost 35% less <Unit Types> vs. the Enemy", or
"You lost 1 DDG vs. 3 enemy DDGs lost"

You can even break down expenditure by Weapon Type -
"You expended 135 BVR AA weapons vs. the enemy's 158". (Basically, one line per unit / weapon type.)

Yes, it may be lopsided in some scenarios (like an Air Force vs Naval Units), but that's OK.
"You expended 39 Long Range SAMS vs the enemy's 0"
"You expended 0 Guided Air-To-Ground Weapons vs the enemy's 32"
"You lost 0 Multi-Role Attack Aircraft vs the enemy's 5"
"You lost 1 Frigate vs. the enemy's 0"

It may take a minute to crunch the numbers, but it only needs to happen once at the end of the scenario.

Maybe even add the ability (via LUA events?) for Scenario Authors to include their own items to the summary, like "3 out of 4 Primary Targets Destroyed", or "Significant (>80%) of enemy air losses incurred."

quote:

ORIGINAL: DONNIE67
planes that are airborne should be added to the flight ops screen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

I really wish there was a way to disable the new feature of borders and coastlines fading out as you zoom in. Currently, the lines disappear completely at a camera altitude of 400 km, which makes it really hard to set up "border-clash" scenarios or exclusion zones, or fine-tuned navigation (since the satellite map doesn't always overlap the actual coast). I don't quite understand what prompted such a change...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ultradave
There may be a technical reason why they aren't there anymore, but would it be possible to bring back some more of the speed-up options?

I find the 15 sec, 1 minute and 5 minute options really useful in submarine scenarios where movement is very slow, or where significant movement needs to happen to close range. The current flaming afterburner speed is a little drastic on my machine, and I find myself nervously ready to stop it before it gets out of hand.

This is definitely a low priority request and nothing that is broken.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oomiz

The thing I absolutely miss the most is a simple volume control.
Not actually a gameplay request and probably a much smaller fix than most things on that list.
But forgetting to adjust the volume mixer on mission startup and getting your ears blown off gets old really quick.

quote:

ORIGINAL: boogabooga

In Aircraft entries in the Database, I think that it would make more sense to put the hyperlinks to the weapons DB entries in with the Aircraft Stores, rather than Aircraft Loadouts. That way, when one looks through the stores and thinks "what is that one?," the hyperlink is right there, no need to comb through loadouts to try to find it again. Also, the hyperlinks are easier to click on in the stores section because there is more space between them.

The CMNAO way of putting them in BOTH places is fine, too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bns130
Ability to natively import GeoTIFF maps into the scenario editor.

quote:


Ability to georectify a jpeg or png image for use as a map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TalonCG2

Feature request - Logistics and transport of supplies

I love the larger, more complex and longer lasting scenarios. This wouldn't really apply to short duration scenarios, but here goes...

Fuel, either a generic non-specific all use, or broken up into categories of ship/aviation/ground unit. Transported by rail, truck, ship or plane to other "frontline" bases.
Munitions, generic "ammo" that will increase by a fixed amount determined by capacity of the transport and what units call the base their home. Or a more complex and specific transport of individual weapons/ammo.

The generic versions would be easier to implement, but not as realistic, but a good compromise over specific items.

Thoughts?

quote:

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

Request: Investigate contact.

if a contact flies into a patrol area, friendlies will autonomously investigate to make an ID. They only need to fly close enough for the sensors to do that.

Conversely if there is no such patrol area (or contact is outside it), there is no way to investigate other than setting an intercept course by estimating "close enough".

I suggest adding an "investigate" action, so that an aircraft will fly just close enough to make the ID (with current EMCON). Thereafter it returns to its prior mission/posture. This could also work for surface & land contacts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeDiameterBomb

I have a feature request that I hope shouldn't be too complicated to implement but that I (and presumably other people as well) would find quite useful.

My suggestion is simply that CMO should include short keys to switch from these brand new and so beautiful different map types. I find myself needing to switch between maps quite often in any scenario where much of the action happens over land (Typical example: the great scenario Under African Skies) as opposed to scenarios where action is over the sea.


Since we necessarily live in the best of all possible worlds, as the philosopher Leibniz so wisely said, where the institutionalized slaughter of other men and women in the form we call war is a regular feature of life and with the existence of war being a prerequisite for the construction of the greatest game ever developed, there also happens to be exactly 12 items on the View roll down menu in CMO that deals with maps and surely it can't be a mere coincidence that a standard QWERTY keyboard also has 12 function keys.

It is obvious that these items (Map Lat/Long Grid, Sentinel-2 satellite map, BMNG Layer... Day + Night Lightning and 3D View) were meant to be paired with these function keys, for example Alt + F1... F12 or Maybe Alt + Shift + F1... F12 or whatever else pairings the developers prefer to choose.

Surely we live in the best of all possible worlds! Why would God, in his omnipotence and all-goodness, construct a world which is not the the best possible?


Still, I of course understand that the developers are occupied with more important work for the time being and don't expect this to be implemented with anything like the highest priority if the developers thinks it's a reasonable idea.


PS. Some sarcasm and humor can be found in this post and it should not be taken as a criticism of any religion - only of the philosophy of Gottfried W Leibniz.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stefanoc

I request some standard armor (light for AIFV, heavy for Tanks) for improving land battles (for now some M16 can destroy Tanks) [:(]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

quote:

ORIGINAL: TalonCG2

Feature request - Logistics and transport of supplies

I love the larger, more complex and longer lasting scenarios. This wouldn't really apply to short duration scenarios, but here goes...

Fuel, either a generic non-specific all use, or broken up into categories of ship/aviation/ground unit. Transported by rail, truck, ship or plane to other "frontline" bases.
Munitions, generic "ammo" that will increase by a fixed amount determined by capacity of the transport and what units call the base their home. Or a more complex and specific transport of individual weapons/ammo.

The generic versions would be easier to implement, but not as realistic, but a good compromise over specific items.

Thoughts?

This is one of the things being worked on.