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 - gameplay features

 
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 >> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
[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: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/19/2013 11:31:25 AM   
coolts


Posts: 391
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline 		I'm surprised more people not voting for TOT/TOS. What's more important to mission execution? Having your weapons in the right place at the right time, or having a few beeps and burps coming from your speakers?

Democracy eh?

_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 91
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/19/2013 4:14:26 PM   
chelu

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 11/3/2013
Status: offline 		I think that refining the air combat evasion is really important. It should also include missile performance againts aircraft or other missiles. Sometimes the number of missiles fired is really high, like three f-16 firing at one su30 two amraam each... And the su30 evades all amraams! There are several scenarios with this situation.

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 92
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/19/2013 4:38:17 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Okay, this is starting to get annoying.

Guys, it's not simply "the Su-30 evaded all 6 AMRAAMs".

Without seeing the message log (which is essential for such a discussion), I would guess that some of them were spoofed, some were jammed, some were evaded, maybe a couple were outrun etc. etc.

You guys have to stop treating AAW missiles with such reverence. AAMs (and SAMs) in combat _miss all the time_. They are jammed, spoofed, blinded, decoyed, out-turned, outrun, and soon they'll start getting fried mid-air by DEWs. The West's most advanced in-service BVR missile (AMRAAM) has a 55% combat kill rate against mostly obsolete aircraft, and it has never been employed against modern countermeasures. Think about that for a moment. Against a modern fighter with state-of-the-art DECM? Good luck.

We are aware that there is still the issue of aircraft retaining their energy reserves after successive evasions in the game, but anyone thinking that getting this fixed will, on its own, drastically alter the kill ratios against modern adversaries, is in for a rude shock.

Now that B460 is out, try this test: Pick that Su-30 (it's a modern variant, right?) and slide the proficiency bar all the way down to novice. Then throw all the AMRAAMs you want at it. Save the message log, and notice how many of the misses were due to kinematic evasion and how many were due to electronic or other countermeasures.

If you want to argue that DECM may be too effective, or that chaff/flares are overmodeled, fine. Let's get into that. We're not perfect and our models probably aren't either. But this whole "aircraft are super-evasive!!!!" thing has been blown out of every possible proportion.

We're long past the age of "I'll hit the brakes and he'll fly right by", guys. Kurt Plummer is right. Better bullets win.

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 11/20/2013 10:35:46 AM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to chelu)
Post #: 93
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/19/2013 10:35:24 PM   
riflebrigade

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 8/1/2005
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Would it be possible to be able to enter a Proficiency level for each unit?

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 94
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/20/2013 5:08:52 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Added.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to riflebrigade)
Post #: 95
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/20/2013 4:06:31 PM   
El Savior

 

Posts: 337
Joined: 7/31/2003
From: Finland
Status: offline 		If I remember correct in Vietnam war only about 5% of SAM missiles actually hit target. I'm happy how the missiles hit or do not hit targets. Of course it is sometimes frustrating to see how often my carefully planned attacks fail. Log is good and explains a lot why missile did not hit.

In my current 1983 scenario USSR vs. USA carrier task force I found out how good F-14 Tomcats are with their long-range AA-missiles. Only MiG-31 seem to be good enough against them. Thankfully Soviets did have many fighters to encounter American forces.

_____________________________

El Savior

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 96
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/20/2013 8:56:52 PM   
thbrix

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/11/2013
Status: offline 		Me too! I thought that wish would sky rocket, because it really puzzles me how in earth you are able to coordinate anything without it???

Maybe because there is more interest towards naval than air?

Well i just hope the feature arrives at some time...



quote:

ORIGINAL: coolts

I'm surprised more people not voting for TOT/TOS. What's more important to mission execution? Having your weapons in the right place at the right time, or having a few beeps and burps coming from your speakers?

Democracy eh?


(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 97
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/21/2013 8:35:37 AM   
Agathosdaimon


Posts: 1034
Joined: 7/8/2012
Status: offline 		i think TOT is extremly important too but perhaps there are a few reasons why it is not polling higher:

- it appeared later in the poll and so many may have already selected an earlier option, but who would rather select TOT planner
- the name TOT Planner should be changed to at least 'Time of Target planner' - people may not know what TOT Planner is and so just go for the more obvious things like sound effects, which i dont personally think are so important as TOT planner

(in reply to thbrix)
Post #: 98
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/21/2013 9:10:53 AM   
JCR

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline 		In order to have bombers survive nukes, could the AI do a post-target-turn (PTT) when carrying nukes?
Immidiately break away after release, like it was SAC doctrine?


< Message edited by JCR -- 11/21/2013 10:11:28 AM >

(in reply to Agathosdaimon)
Post #: 99
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/21/2013 10:35:52 AM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JCR

In order to have bombers survive nukes, could the AI do a post-target-turn (PTT) when carrying nukes?
Immidiately break away after release, like it was SAC doctrine?



Might be an idea for Engaged Defensive to take into account imminent nuclear weapons detonation.

_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to JCR)
Post #: 100
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/21/2013 2:04:18 PM   
coolts


Posts: 391
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Agathosdaimon

i think TOT is extremly important too but perhaps there are a few reasons why it is not polling higher:

- it appeared later in the poll and so many may have already selected an earlier option, but who would rather select TOT planner
- the name TOT Planner should be changed to at least 'Time of Target planner' - people may not know what TOT Planner is and so just go for the more obvious things like sound effects, which i dont personally think are so important as TOT planner



That's a valid point. In fact, there should be a "no acronyms day", on these forums every now and again!........or NAD for short

_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to Agathosdaimon)
Post #: 101
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/21/2013 2:06:14 PM   
JCR

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline 		TINEFA
There is no escape from acronyms

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 102
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/22/2013 4:09:48 AM   
MR_BURNS2


Posts: 974
Joined: 7/18/2013
From: Austria
Status: offline 		Edit Patrol Area for Strike/Air Intercept mission.

_____________________________

Windows 7 64; Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz; 6144MB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970;



(in reply to JCR)
Post #: 103
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/22/2013 2:04:56 PM   
jdkbph


Posts: 339
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: CT, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: riflebrigade

Would it be possible to be able to enter a Proficiency level for each unit?



I voted for something else a while back when the list was much shorter so now I can't vote for this. But for what it's worth, I would if I could.

JD

(in reply to riflebrigade)
Post #: 104
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/23/2013 2:28:28 PM   
Sator


Posts: 134
Joined: 8/8/2012
From: Italy
Status: offline 		+1. I think admin could reset the poll and let we vote again.

(in reply to jdkbph)
Post #: 105
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/24/2013 10:17:29 AM   
thbrix

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/11/2013
Status: offline 		Suggestion; "Jump to location" links in the message log.

(in reply to Sator)
Post #: 106
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/25/2013 5:48:50 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Removed "Background music" (added in B465) and "Secondary windows should remember position & size" (added in B466). If you voted for these you can vote again.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 107
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/27/2013 6:31:48 PM   
damarafaka

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 5/22/2011
Status: offline 		I would request that Command be tablet/touch ready allowing play on full windows capable tablets. It would be nice to pinch-zoom with fingers, micromanage with stylus instead of a mouse and being able to leave the physical keyboard completely out of the picture. Could open up a different way of playing the simulator. Could be fun.

(in reply to miller7219)
Post #: 108
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/27/2013 6:53:21 PM   
tommo8993

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline 		The one think I would want is a simple "drag box" style of ASW missions. At the moment I cant do ASW, too complicated. But if it was just as simple as select an attack option, then drag a box in the area you want to search. Then I'm sorted for must have features in the game.

(in reply to damarafaka)
Post #: 109
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/27/2013 7:51:07 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tommo8993
The one think I would want is a simple "drag box" style of ASW missions. At the moment I cant do ASW, too complicated. But if it was just as simple as select an attack option, then drag a box in the area you want to search. Then I'm sorted for must have features in the game.


I think you can already do that. Define an area (right-click on map, select "define area", left-drag mouse to define area rectangle), create an ASW mission using this area, assign the desired units to that mission, and off they go.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to tommo8993)
Post #: 110
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/28/2013 10:46:02 PM   
JCR

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline 		Another small idea:
How about showing weapon mount arcs in the database viewer?

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 111
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/29/2013 9:58:34 PM   
riflebrigade

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 8/1/2005
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Sunburn has the ability to enter a Proficiency level for each unit been added to the game?

If so how is this accessed?

I asked if this could be added on the 11/19/2013 and your following post of 11/20/2013 advised "added", was this for unit Proficiency levels?

(in reply to miller7219)
Post #: 112
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/29/2013 10:58:25 PM   
ExMachina


Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline 		Cavitation control.

How about a select-able option in the F2 menu for "No Cavitation"? When checked, the unit will never go fast enough to cavitate regardless of speed selected (evasive manuvers would over-ride).

For example, this option would allow the player to set subs to flank speed and, regardless of depth, they would always maintain their fastest possible speed below the cavitation threshold.

(in reply to riflebrigade)
Post #: 113
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/29/2013 11:47:06 PM   
snowburn


Posts: 188
Joined: 9/24/2013
From: Bovril, Argentina
Status: offline 		Time to remove: More sounds :)

(in reply to ExMachina)
Post #: 114
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 12:58:42 AM   
Alex170g

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline 		Two interface improvement that I would love to see

1.- the ability to mark a contact not just neutral, hostile etc, but also add the ability to the human player to determine a class type for a contact, later, when the AI gets more data, it can show the correct class type.

Hmm!, this contact should be a enemy trawler, don´t overshoot SSM at her…..minutes later….-sir, remember that target that you suppose that was a trawler, in fact it’s krivak class warship

2.- the ability to know what each patform is detecting…this had been discussed in other threats, and to avoid a large list of contacts I think the best method can be selecting a single friendly unit and then select a single target unit , a command (key board combo, drop down menu or button)should bring a list with all the sensors from the friendly unit, and a single yes or no to show if the target unit is detected by that sensor.

example: I would like to know when my aircraft’s radar is breaking enemy jamming, and thus painting a target to attack it with SARH

(in reply to snowburn)
Post #: 115
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 7:16:27 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: riflebrigade

Sunburn has the ability to enter a Proficiency level for each unit been added to the game?

If so how is this accessed?

I asked if this could be added on the 11/19/2013 and your following post of 11/20/2013 advised "added", was this for unit Proficiency levels?


I meant it was added to the poll. Apologies for the confusion.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to riflebrigade)
Post #: 116
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 7:18:06 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JCR

Another small idea:
How about showing weapon mount arcs in the database viewer?


Thanks, added.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to JCR)
Post #: 117
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 8:08:54 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ExMachina

Cavitation control.

How about a select-able option in the F2 menu for "No Cavitation"? When checked, the unit will never go fast enough to cavitate regardless of speed selected (evasive manuvers would over-ride).

For example, this option would allow the player to set subs to flank speed and, regardless of depth, they would always maintain their fastest possible speed below the cavitation threshold.


Nice idea! Added.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to ExMachina)
Post #: 118
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 8:10:02 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: snowburn
Time to remove: More sounds :)


Tempted to do this, but I think we still need optional sounds for message types (or possibly integrating some of the SeaHag functionality). So leaving it open for a while yet.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to snowburn)
Post #: 119
RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features - 11/30/2013 8:47:24 AM   
thbrix

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/11/2013
Status: offline 		Hi

I am playing with the editor, and i miss the ability to "Draw" on the map. I would like to draw boxes, circles, corridors and write text, all this in different colours. I need this to be able to define areas of responsibility, airspacelimits and so forth.

This tool would also have value in "non-editor-mode". So the player can use the drawing tool in all missions.

The drawing should of course be saved with the missionfile.

Maybe its a crazy idea, what do i know, but i think it would a great tool, both in missiondesign and play.

Best regards.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: RUNNING POLL - gameplay features Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

8.328