Primarchx wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2019 2:57 pm It's not up there but more sonar data would be nice and make ASW ops more engaging. Realtime info about platform self-noise, contact sound strength and sensor acuity at current speed would all be very useful in prosecuting sonar targets.

Scorpion86 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:19 pm 1 - A way of tweaking an aircraft's refuelling logic
I can't count the number of times I was in the middle of a strike when the attacking aircraft decided to go refuel all on it's own and fly 300 miles to the nearest tanker. And when I stopped it manually, it would go back to refuelling.
Today, when I want to control a single aircraft's refuelling logic, all you have is the "allow refuelling/do not refuel" drop down menu. But when you have a mission, you can tell the aircraft on patrol to only refuel from tankers of mission X, to only refuel if there's a tanker within Y miles, or to only refuel when you're down to W% of fuel. That would be nice to have for aircraft not assigned to a mission as well.
Basicly I want the options from the menu in the attached picture in the Doctrine options, with the "search for tanker" option expressed in "BINGO + percentage fuel remaining" instead of just "percent fuel remaining".

2 - Have WRA ranges for weapons set in percentage of range rather than 5nm increments
When I was play-testing my latest scenario, For The Honour Of The Republic (*cough*shameless self-promotion*cough*), I had Portuguese AF A-7Ps armed with AIM-9L-1 missiles going against Yak-38M Forgers armed with R-60M Aphids.
The AIM-9L-1 has a 10nm range, but the WRA only allows me to set the automatic firing range between the full 10nm or 5nm, nothing else. If I fired the AIM-9s at 10nm, the Forgers would shake them, if I fired them at 5nm, my fighters would be close enough to be shot at by the Aphids. If I could set the auto-fire distance to 75% of the range, that would be ideal.
Having the ranges of weapons in the WRA menu set in 5nm increments may be more intuitive, but it penalises scenarios using shorter-ranged weapons, like mid-to-late cold war fighter duels.
Another option is a sliding scale: increments of 2nm for ranges from 0 to 20nm, increments of 5nm for ranges from 20 to 100nm, and of 10nm for ranges >100nm.

Grazyn wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 9:23 am I'd really love to have a search tool for the cargo list.

Majick wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:41 am Hi,

I've voted for FOW on TacView.

Could I also suggest that it would be very nice if the Tacview colours and the CMO map icon colours were in line.
Not sure if you can achieve this as it seems to me CMOs colours are correct (Blue friendly forces, red hostile etc) and maybe you can't control the colours displayed in TacView.

But it's quite offputting to see enemy forces displayed as friendly on TacView and vice versa

Duck Doc wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:59 am AMP integrating tankers would be ginormous!

LMychajluk wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 6:09 pm Ability to create a Strike Mission and add targets to it, but only have it trigger once the Target is Hostile. I'd like to be able to set up Strike Missions that will launch to attack specific enemy AEW, Radars, AAD, Ships, etc..., but only after they've been declared Hostile. As of now, the 'Auto-Launch' part works, but you can't specify targets for the mission.

As of now, the 'Hostile' as a minimum is there at the top of the Dialog Box, but as soon as you add a specific target to the mission, the side becomes Hostile.

DONNIE67 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:31 am planes that are airborne should be added to the flight ops screen.

Scar79 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:19 pm Dear developers, i asked this question in FB CMO-group(official) but decided to duplicate it here: Is it possible to make some sort of 'training' torpedoes, so they could hit their targets, thus generating HIT event, but without inflicting any damage to said targets? Thank you in advance.

guanotwozero wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:38 am 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.

Scar79 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:13 am

ORIGINAL: Scar79

It would be cool if the game could remember the position and size of the Main, Message Log and 3D window. Or even make some sort of the "working layout", with Message Log and 3D window docked to the left from the Main, with ability to change their relative size with a help of movable borders.



Repost from: fb.asp?m=4731463

Randomizer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:40 pm With reference to this thread:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4734838&mpage=1&key=&#4735512

Request the ability to target area weapons such as artillery, iron bombs and free-flight rockets at locations specified by just a mouse click. As the CMO ground combat becomes more detailed, hiding units in forests and jungles becomes increasingly practical. Now, the Scenario Author must provide target markers for these to be engaged but in real life the option existed to dump vast quantities of gravity bombs or artillery shells into an area with the hope that there might be something there to kill.

Having the ability to do so in CMO might be a good feature to have.

-C

MikeKozlowski wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 1:17 pm ...Would very much like to ask if we could get an "ignore terrain" option such as the one Harpoon has. There's quite a few places on the map that are more than capable of handling CV sized ships, but they show as land - for instance, in my hometown of Lorain, OH, the Black River is capable of handling 1000 foot long iron ore carriers, but shows as solid ground on the map. The Mississippi River at St. Louis, MO, shows as solid ground with an elevation of 400 feet. This would open up a LOT of coastal and riverine warfare options, as well as give us the ability to simulate the Chinese island bases in the Pacific.

I understand completely that this may be a map issue that can't readily be addressed, so an Ignore Terrain option might be the best possible option. Thanks in advance!

Blast33 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:49 am Nice setup this poll
Is it possible to conquer an enemy airfield, with for example an airborne assault, and than use that airfield as your aircraft for other units. (so the airfield has to switch sides).
Is this an idea?

LetMePickThat wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 8:26 pm - Ballistic Missiles w. depressed trajectories (Fateh-110/313, Iskander)

Frostitute wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:44 pm I'd like to suggest a copy and paste function into the game, specifically for mission doctrines. I tend to make a lot of missions and setting up the rules on tens of very different missions can be a pain. Indeed an option to just copy the mission entirely would be nice too, can just tweak the reference points and have most of the less interesting missions done quickly. A similar functionality for weapons would be nice too, it's a little tedious to manually tweak weapons to be more frugal or to reduce ranges for multiple different near-identical missiles. Especially if missiles shots by range percentage were implemented, could rush through all BVR missiles to fire singles at 75% range (for example) very quickly like that. Would the team be open to mission planner suggestions too? It seems like its something being worked on presently and if its too far along I'd imagine a lot of UI suggestions and the like might not work out.

TitaniumTrout wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:13 am Could we get the ability to add Folders to the Quick Battle rather like the scenario browser?



Rather like this so we can nest folders in the Quick Battles folder.

kfarley215 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 6:29 pm There is no question that a TOT indicator for selected aircraft for a strike mission is useful in order to plan multiple strike missions in a coordinated fashion to address "peel the onion" layered strategic operations. However, when combined with Air Refueling then solving Refueling logic is a pre-requisite. I have the following re-fueling logic recommendations:

1. Refueling logic should be broken down into "phases" so that each phase can have appropriate logic. Currently the logic is "did the refueling trigger fire based on % available fuel?" If so, "chase the nearest tanker within the parameter of which mission the tanker belongs to, based on the refueling properties of the base mission." I believe I am stating this accurately but please correct me if I haven't.

2. Refueling phases are as follows. Phase 1: do I have a refueling solution already provided? (Either a tanker assigned to trail me in my mission or a tanker assigned to a Support misson.)
a. If I have trailing refuel solution, then wait for refuel trigger and initiate "chase the tanker" (the current refuel behavior).
b. If I have been assigned a Refuel mission in the mission properties, then add a Way Point (like Strike Missions) that map to the Refuel Zone of the assigned Refuel mission. Once the waypoint is reached within the center or perimeter of the Refuel zone (whichever the Devs prefer) only then initiate the "chase the tanker" logic.
c. If neither of the 2 conditions above, (the refuel mission is to be the closest available) then the Phase 1 (find a refuel solution) should occur prior to the "low fuel" trigger and should be something like "forecasted refuel tanker" starting at about 15% prior to refuel trigger fires. "Forecasted refuel solution" should evaluate the universe of available tankers based on range and flight plans. The aircraft knows its own flight plan and it is reasonable to suppose that the aircraft knows the flight plan of eligible tankers. The set of "forecasted refuel solutions" should be ordered by nearest forecasted aircraft to current flight plans (with estimate for tankers circling a refuel area). Given an ordered set of refuel solutions, updated every 5% of fuel used to stay current, the final choice of refuel solution will be to choose from the forecasted set based on available fuel and refuel queue of the tanker.

I believe the 3 rules above replicate the decision making process that would be considered "common sense" for refueling, but of course I am not a trained Refueling CWO. I was however a Logistics office in the US Army Communications Command and since I've been a software engineer for many years so this describes logic that I think might replicate what I do now as a player of CMO.

Thanks for the great Sim, looking forward to many years of enjoying it!