Hi all,
Following the success of the original long-running requests poll, we are introducing a new similar poll for Command: Modern Operations.
The initial poll options include both brand new CMO-specific requests as well as the most popular items from the original poll that we have not implemented just yet.
If you have a request that is not already on the list, post it here so that it may be included.
The caveats of the original poll still apply:
* When your voted request is resolved and thus disappears from the poll, you can re-cast your vote to another one.
* IMPORTANT: If a request is voted on top it doesn't necessarily mean it will be the one that will first be resolved, as there can be a number of reasons that prevent us from addressing it at that point. It will, however, make us note it as being a highly desirable element for the users.
Cast away!
CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Moderator: MOD_Command
-
Ancalagon451
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:04 am
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
TOT for the strike planner.
Even if it makes my CPU melt in a puddle of liquid hidrocarbon and heavy metals, it's worthy of the sacrifice.
Ancalagon
Even if it makes my CPU melt in a puddle of liquid hidrocarbon and heavy metals, it's worthy of the sacrifice.
Ancalagon
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Voted. Woot!
"AMP - Continuous coverage planner" ?
(I'm sure it'd be cool...but I don't know what it is, or what the"AMP" part means.)
"AMP - Continuous coverage planner" ?
(I'm sure it'd be cool...but I don't know what it is, or what the"AMP" part means.)
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
The ability to carry units over from one scenario to the next will allow a long requested 'Linked Campaign', something that would add a layer of depth to the gameplay experience.
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Hellos
Database mod editors
or
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into scenario editor. Maybes when scenario saved can save all used units from database and then scenario don't ever refer to again until updates. So instead of there always being db dependency it only happen during creation and update. (Update check for what exists in db and ignore everything else). Ini file then update what ignored.
Database mod editors
or
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into scenario editor. Maybes when scenario saved can save all used units from database and then scenario don't ever refer to again until updates. So instead of there always being db dependency it only happen during creation and update. (Update check for what exists in db and ignore everything else). Ini file then update what ignored.
Don't call it a comeback...
-
Randomizer
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:31 pm
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Local weather fronts!
-C
-C
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Hi c3kORIGINAL: c3k
Voted. Woot!
"AMP - Continuous coverage planner" ?
(I'm sure it'd be cool...but I don't know what it is, or what the"AMP" part means.)
AMP is short for Advanced Mission Planner. A tool for planning missions in minute detail.
The continuous coverage planner helps you to plan for instance a BARCAP mission where the replacement planes arrive on station before the relieved planes leave station.
Søren
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
I would like to request some kind of "warning shot" and "boarding action" attacks.
A warning shot would be a deliberate miss...you fire and no damage is done, but your opponent would respond as if you had fired a shot over their bow. Maybe you could select the result (e.g., "warning shot/demand surrender," "warning shot/opponent must withdraw to a certain distance," etc. (There are probably ways to do this with aircraft and ground units, too.)
A boarding action would only be allowed if you were a ship designed to board other vessels (e.g., a RHIB) and would require you to get close enough to get people on board the other ship...after this, either the other ship surrenders (changes sides so it now under player control) or you get a message saying the boarding action failed and maybe the RHIB sinks or something.
There are ways to do some of these things with lua actions, but it's kind of clunky. Suffice that there are a lot of conflicts that don't end with ships actually sinking each other. I think it would add something to the game if some of these options were made available to players.
Thanks!
A warning shot would be a deliberate miss...you fire and no damage is done, but your opponent would respond as if you had fired a shot over their bow. Maybe you could select the result (e.g., "warning shot/demand surrender," "warning shot/opponent must withdraw to a certain distance," etc. (There are probably ways to do this with aircraft and ground units, too.)
A boarding action would only be allowed if you were a ship designed to board other vessels (e.g., a RHIB) and would require you to get close enough to get people on board the other ship...after this, either the other ship surrenders (changes sides so it now under player control) or you get a message saying the boarding action failed and maybe the RHIB sinks or something.
There are ways to do some of these things with lua actions, but it's kind of clunky. Suffice that there are a lot of conflicts that don't end with ships actually sinking each other. I think it would add something to the game if some of these options were made available to players.
Thanks!
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
AMP hands down. But since it's divided in 3 parts I'm not sure I understand I voted for "AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff". Building ATO is quite handy and allows for way more challenging scenarios without just throwing more units to make it "harder"
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: Sharana
AMP hands down. But since it's divided in 3 parts I'm not sure I understand I voted for "AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff". Building ATO is quite handy and allows for way more challenging scenarios without just throwing more units to make it "harder"
What do you mean by "Building ATO"? Is that some aspect of your gameplay (hopefully that you're willing to share with the community so we can learn from it), or a CMO feature request?
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: BDukes
Hellos
Database mod editors
or
Implements full unit edit capability (loadouts, calcs) into scenario editor. Maybes when scenario saved can save all used units from database and then scenario don't ever refer to again until updates. So instead of there always being db dependency it only happen during creation and update. (Update check for what exists in db and ignore everything else). Ini file then update what ignored.
Thanks, added.
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: Mgellis
I would like to request some kind of "warning shot" and "boarding action" attacks.
A warning shot would be a deliberate miss...you fire and no damage is done, but your opponent would respond as if you had fired a shot over their bow. Maybe you could select the result (e.g., "warning shot/demand surrender," "warning shot/opponent must withdraw to a certain distance," etc. (There are probably ways to do this with aircraft and ground units, too.)
A boarding action would only be allowed if you were a ship designed to board other vessels (e.g., a RHIB) and would require you to get close enough to get people on board the other ship...after this, either the other ship surrenders (changes sides so it now under player control) or you get a message saying the boarding action failed and maybe the RHIB sinks or something.
There are ways to do some of these things with lua actions, but it's kind of clunky. Suffice that there are a lot of conflicts that don't end with ships actually sinking each other. I think it would add something to the game if some of these options were made available to players.
Thanks!
Thanks, added both.
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: Gunner98
The ability to carry units over from one scenario to the next will allow a long requested 'Linked Campaign', something that would add a layer of depth to the gameplay experience.
+1 I cast my vote on behalf of the Fury Linked Campaign project
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: Schr75
Hi c3kORIGINAL: c3k
Voted. Woot!
"AMP - Continuous coverage planner" ?
(I'm sure it'd be cool...but I don't know what it is, or what the"AMP" part means.)
AMP is short for Advanced Mission Planner. A tool for planning missions in minute detail.
The continuous coverage planner helps you to plan for instance a BARCAP mission where the replacement planes arrive on station before the relieved planes leave station.
Søren
Thanks!
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Hi, first of all i wish to express my excitement about CMO upcoming release!
I wonder: In the new version of CMO, will we get something, that one could describe as a 'Multiple Missile/Target Strike Calculator' tool, that could automatically set the different flight routes for the missiles-in-salvo, to make them arrive to the target(s) more-or-less simultaneously and from the different angles?
IMO, this option is critically vital for all the paltforms and groups armed with strike guided missiles. Thank you in advance for your reply.
I wonder: In the new version of CMO, will we get something, that one could describe as a 'Multiple Missile/Target Strike Calculator' tool, that could automatically set the different flight routes for the missiles-in-salvo, to make them arrive to the target(s) more-or-less simultaneously and from the different angles?
IMO, this option is critically vital for all the paltforms and groups armed with strike guided missiles. Thank you in advance for your reply.
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: Fido81
What do you mean by "Building ATO"? Is that some aspect of your gameplay (hopefully that you're willing to share with the community so we can learn from it), or a CMO feature request?
It's a feature request. Having "AMP - Ability to edit flightplans prior to takeoff" will allow to have ATO (air tasking order) where you can see all your planned sorties which means much easier synchronization - be it with tankers or the same ToT for an entire package.
As scenario designer on the other hand you can prepare complex flight plans for the AI side that utilizes low level flights, using the terrain properly, better escort and so on which would make it a lot harder for the players compared to what AI does when you just tell it attack that.
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
Although the poll option descriptions can be found in the posts above, it might be best if they're all neatly edited into the original post for clarity.
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
I'd like to submit 3 suggestions:
1)Implement Fog Of War in Tacview, so we can only see units we know about, instead of truth, (so using Tacview does not equate to cheating).
2)Some kind for speech to text ability would be great (Like the functionality SeaHag does)
3)The ability for AAR/Export to Tacview, so we can re-watch and entire scenario with Tac-view (like PE has) [EDIT: Not coming according to Dev]
Thank you!
1)Implement Fog Of War in Tacview, so we can only see units we know about, instead of truth, (so using Tacview does not equate to cheating).
2)Some kind for speech to text ability would be great (Like the functionality SeaHag does)
3)The ability for AAR/Export to Tacview, so we can re-watch and entire scenario with Tac-view (like PE has) [EDIT: Not coming according to Dev]
Thank you!
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
can i haz riot control and chemical/biological weapon simulation? [:D]
RE: CMO RUNNING POLL - Gameplay feature requests
ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr
I'd like to submit 3 suggestions:
1)Implement Fog Of War in Tacview, so we can only see units we know about, instead of truth, (so using Tacview does not equate to cheating).
2)Some kind for speech to text ability would be great (Like the functionality SeaHag does)
3)The ability for AAR/Export to Tacview, so we can re-watch and entire scenario with Tac-view (like PE has) [EDIT: Not coming according to Dev]
Thank you!
Thanks, all added.