RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: tobias02

I would love the opportunity to have mechanical breakdowns to the Aircraft: two Tornado fly up to bomb two stations SAM, one of the two mid-term accuses a problem with the engines and must return to base. It would be an unexpected change in scenery. (You could do by forcing the RTB command.) It 'just an idea.[;)]
Thank you.

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

Could we please have an event Action to modify ROE's or at the very least, trigger Nuclear Release. Apologies if already on the List in which case treat as a gentle "bump".

Thanks.

-C

IIRC this is now possible with Lua.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

Random ideas humbly submitted for consideration:

Allow a way to "paint" terrain on the map. The way I envision it, it'd essentially be like creating an exclusion zone, where you designate an area of the map with reference points to be a certain kind of terrain. The idea is to create layers that making facilities and units more difficult to find. I don't think it needs to be super detailed, but maybe a handful of terrain types. Default, which we have now and wouldn't require any effort to "paint", would be "open". This is generally open grass or dirt or sand. Then you might have "light forest", for scattered pockets of trees to simulate rural areas or savanna and in general be easier for ground units to hide in, but only marginally so for spotters with FLIR or radar. Another terrain type could be "dense forest" to represent jungles or deep woods where the canopy is especially difficult to see through, but maybe a little less so for synthetic aperture radars or FLIRs (or you get more 'unknown contacts' vice positive IDs. The third type would be "urban" to represent dense cities, and be generally very difficult to spot infantry-type units or positively ID buildings and vehicles.

In general, I think the terrain feature would be used for small objective areas - no need to paint whole continents, but just enough to make it a little tougher for small areas that you're conducting operations in.

Added.

Give helicopters a different throttle and altitude menu. Right now, helicopters are considered to be no different from fixed wing aircraft and, as such, default to the highest altitude they can fly at. Having spent a considerable amount of time in and around helicopters, I've never been in one that flew much more that 2000 feet AGL, nevermind the 12,000 feet they fly at in Command. Would it be possible to give helicopters altitude presets that are a little more realistic - like gradations between 2000 feet and min altitude? Maybe like minimum (20 feet-ish), 100 feet, 200 feet, 500 feet? Of course, you can manually set the altitude to max/12000 feet, but the AI-controlled missions would now operate at much more realistic altitudes.

This has been implemented in v1.06.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

How about geometric sonobuoy patterns like those use by P-3's, Nimrod and other airborne ASW assets. The current "Sherwin Williams" tactic of painting the ocean in sonobuoys is a huge waste of ordnance and computer resources.

The player should be able to specify the type of pattern and orientation desired. For example, a player could tell the aircraft to lay 16 sonobuoys oriented SW starting at a point selected on the map. The spacing would be based upon the predicted detection range (or player definable). Some suggested patterns would be a circle, line, double line, sawtooth or box. A line barrier pattern is a must for chokepoints.

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999


May I request two new features for the next version of C:MANO?
1) the ability to group aircraft in the mission editor. So that the computer side has a realistic CAP not of 1 aircraft but consisting of 2 or more airplanes.
2) the ability to control the aircraft's altitude for their mission in the mission editor. Once again as a human player you can easily adjust this but for the IA side this will create more realistic and interesting strike or CAP missions.

And I would also like to report a bug. In the mission editor airplanes assigned to a mission don't react if you change mission speed.

Both of these have been implemented in v1.06.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Staneth
2) Display somewhere on the unit info panel on the right side the current state of "Ignore plotted course when attacking" and "Hold fire" for that unit. Ideally I would like checkboxes similar to the Speed and Altitude manual overrides so they could also be controlled from the info panel. This would save having to open the Unit Orders->Attack Options menu for each unit to check the current setting.

This is available in v1.06 IIRC.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

An out there, long term request: a Quick Battle Generator. Something that'll build a quick scenario to shoot stuff (preventing me from getting carried away in the scenario editor, losing hours upon hours playing around). I don't even necessarily need player-selected parameters - give me 2-3 units against 2-3 opposing units and let me see what I can do with it.

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

An idea for a new gameplay feature (which may require some additions to the databases)...

Space operations

* Depending on the era, it should be possible to employ anti-satellite weapons to eliminate satellites. Among others, I believe the SM-3 missile is capable of taking out satellites in low orbit.

* Possibly add the Space Shuttle and Skylab to the databases as "satellites" that could be used to spot things

* Make it possible for the space shuttle (and possibly other vessels in orbit like the X-20 Dyna-Soar) to launch anti-satellite weapons and/or carry lasers. Naturally, some satellites might themselves be anti-satellite weapons. The first phase of a scenario might begin with a couple of critical satellites blinking out just when the data they were providing was needed...

I'm sure there are other things that could be done with satellites in Command, but I can't think of them at the moment.

Anyway, it was just a thought. Comments? Suggestions?

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: CV60

In addition to better weather modeling, could the game include a small sunrise/sunset/nautical twilight calculator? This would be very helpful, especially for the cold war scenarios. I know such calculators are on-line, but having one in the game would help for strike planning.

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: AlexGGGG

I'd like to see adjustment of engagement ranges.

Let's consider CAP fighters engaging incoming aircraft. Once enemy closes in, at some point fighters will fire AAMs, normally two per target. This happens at some "default" range. Now missiles PH drops with range, sometimes radically. If the incoming aircraft are fighters, that's OK. If it is the bombers that are incoming, which cannot shoot back, I would like to engage at much shorter ranges, so as not to loose PH. So I would like an option like "adjust engagement range" and then, like "Default", "3/4 default" and "1/2 default". Harpoon CE I recall had this for SAMs. This might be a doctrine setting, so it can be applied at all levels from side-wide down to individual units. Effectively, I'm looking for a setting to balance between maintaining maximum standoff and achieving maximum kills per weapon fired.

This is coming in v1.07.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: Grondoval

I would like to make a suggestion:

How about the option to enable a message when a vehicle reaches a specific waypoint (in the waypoint menu you could select IF you want to be notified and in the game menu you could select HOW you want to be notified - per message log or time-stop-pop-up). You could plot some complicated ingress route for a strike and enable the pop up message for the last waypoint before target and dont miss out details of the strike.

Something that says (Unit XY or Group XY has reached Waypoint XY)

Added.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: deepdive

I would like that an unknown contact would freeze in its track (stop jumping around) loose its pointer and fade slowly away, like change to an grey or darker colour, and remove uncertain rings, at least to be selectable, also for those displayed seconds since last fixed position, to be selectable for uncluttering of the map.

Bjørn

Currently working on this for v1.07.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: pepolk0001

Ability to change color of grouped reference points and shaded patrol/prosecution areas. Ability to show/hide specific missions via the map display menu.

Artist's conception included.

Added both.

[deepdive]

Wow thats just wonderful [&o]

I have to add that any contact should have "consisted" Track number...it should be the same if not lost, and show at the end of the name when it is positively identified, to make it easier to keep track of strike missions, as time goes by....as is now, i have to give every land target a track number when it is positively identified. sorry my inglish.

Bjørn

[DWReese]

I would like to see improvements made to the EW aspect of the game. As of right now, the EW needs to be micromanaged.

Doug

[pepolk0001]

In OOB window: when a mission or group assigned to mission is selected, all units (vice just one) are highlighted on map and associated orbit track/area is visible on map.

[pepolk0001]

In addition to "selected/all/do not show" would like a "mouse over" setting option on applicable map display items.

[pepolk0001]

Would like the option of abbreviated datablocks that show the call sign only, with full block on mouseover/selection

[pepolk0001]

Ability to "click twice" for renaming in the OOB window. I like that I can use it to quickly select units by mission, but if the unit isn't airborne, I currently have to wait until airborne/deployed to rename it (as far as I know).

Currently I have to close/reopen for list to refresh after rename also.

[pepolk0001]

The "artist concept" for the mission area color coding showed a window with colored mission names, however perhaps instead of a whole new window this color coding could just be incorporated into the OOB window mission headings, which is already a pretty good tool.