RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

[magi]

I have the side… The feature I want more than any other… First… Is better screen resolution ......

[FoxZz]

I'd like to propose a new thing to the list.

Would it be possible to make the altitude indication refering to the ground level and not the sea level up to the medium altitude bar (3000m +) ? From 0 to 3/4000 meters the altitude would be indicated refering to the ground altitude, past this bar it would be indicated refering to teh sea altitude.
For example when you set your plane altitude to 500m it would mean 500m above ground level, and if you're flying above a 200m high hill, it would be equal to an 700m altitude above sea. But if you set your plane to an altitude of 5000m it would be 5000m above sea. Currently the minimal altitude preset works that way, and it would be usefull to extend this feature to all the low altitude presets. Since when you are at low altitude what interest you is the space ebtween you and the surface level, not the theorical sea altitude.

This would be very usefull concerning low altitude flights and minimal weapons release altitude. Those are indicated in ground altitude, while the plane altitude is indicated in sea altitude. Thus it often results in approximationon on the right altitude to set to allow weapon release, and thus, the aircraft tend to overclimb and be shot at. Basically, when you use low flying altitude you want to fly as low as possible and thus you need precise indications on your actual altitude from surface.

I hope my point was clear enough :p, thanks to consider this.

[FoxZz]

I also have another proposal :

When you add a sensor or a weapon to a unit, you have to check all those boxes to set the angle of firing or detection, etc. Would it be possible to add one box saying "check all", so that if you want to set a 360° coverage you would only have to check on box instead of twelve ? And if you want a 280 coverage, it's only a few box to uncheck rather than checking a dozen.

[stilesw]

I would really like to see this also - one click instead of 16. On a similar note, would it be possible to select multiple units to be assigned to a mission by selecting the first unit, hold down the shift key and select the last unit so that all the units between them would be picked? There are times when there may be say 36 F-15s available for and AAW mission but I only want to use the first 18 (or 12-24). This would obviate the need to select all 18 individually. Thanks for considering this.

Wayne Stiles

[PoorOldSpike]

Ships with CIWS and guns won't automatically turn to bring them to bear on incoming anti-ship missiles in the CIWS/guns blind spots, even though the missiles are detected at 10 nm or more and the ships have therefore got plenty of time to turn, so the sooner this is fixed the better because it's a real game-killer for me.
Suggestion- the devs could do a spot of re-programming to get rid of blind spots so that CIWS/guns have 360-degree coverage and can engage "abstractedly", i.e. we can assume ships are turning even though we can't actually see them doing so.

[AlexinCT]

I would like a lua command that allows me to add, remove, or modify weapons content at a facility. Specifically the ammo storage sites. This would be even more powerful if the recently introduced lua command that allows you to make units switch sides would do so with grouped facilities too. You can then with this combination simulate landings and facilities being captured and reused by the force that captured that facility.

[WBailey]

I wish I could vote for multiple things on this list! I didn't notice dynamic campaign until after I voted, I think I would prefer that over my previous first choice (aircraft damage model).

[Primarchx]

ORIGINAL: AlexinCT

I would like a lua command that allows me to add, remove, or modify weapons content at a facility. Specifically the ammo storage sites. This would be even more powerful if the recently introduced lua command that allows you to make units switch sides would do so with grouped facilities too. You can then with this combination simulate landings and facilities being captured and reused by the force that captured that facility.

I've wanted methods that allows you to a) change a unit's side (accomplished!) and b) add a unit to a formation. This is so I could create a side called Logistics which whose units (Ammo facilities with magazines) would be teleported in, switched to a given side and grouped with a given unit on a certain trigger. Your request is cool, too, as it would allow you to add/delete/modify existing content in existing units, too.

[Primarchx]

One more pop to the top of the stack for a request for an LOS tool.

[ThornEel]

Does extended space operations include the Soviet Polyus-Skif orbital laser? The more hypothetical Project Thor? Orion battleships? Orion orbital 3000 MT nuclear weapon?

[ColonelMolerat]

A small thing - could the database perhaps have a clearer range listing for units' weapons (such as a separate field)? It would be nice if, when viewing a unit, I could tell at a glance how close it needs to be to fire. At the moment, the range can get a little lost in the other info.

[Vici Supreme]

Could there be a misson editor option to make the 1/3rd rule apply to all aircraft of various types rather then only aircraft of the same model when assigned to patrol missions such as ASW, ASuW or Sea Control? NATO's SNMGs are a good example, carrying a bunch of different helicopters (in some rare cases two of same type). Setting up an ASW box with three different ASW helos in 1/3rd rotation assigned will not really work here since the AI currently launches all three helicopter then. Especially in big scenarios, it would come in very useful if Command could handle this so the player could focus his attention on other things going on.

Thanks for considering!

Supreme

[skorpio667]

Today I posted a spreadsheet for strike planning and one of the posters mentioned the progress of the in-game planner. Then a thought hit me: perhaps it is possible for the dev's to implement a stage were we can set a launch time for a strike (already possible with the mission planner) but also set a manual plot before a mission is launched?

Then we could enjoy multi axis strikes with a orchestrated time of impact with the use of external strike planners and manual control over speed and altitude!

Skorpio

[iborg]

I voted for ToT planner.
AN idea I didn't see (I think) mentioned : being able to set escorts for patrol and support missions. Example : setting a support mission with a tanker or AEW plane, and assigning a fighter escort to it.

[ComDev]

Removed items added in v1.11 [:D]

[tjhkkr]

Does the staff look at this poll any more?
I am more curious than anything... you guys already do so much for this game.

[thewood1]

I haven't seen this request yet...

Be able to create multiple use profiles. Profiles would include all sensor settings, vector settings, view settings, and maybe even game settings. This would allow a player to create multiple profiles that can be quickly loaded on scenario start.

For example...I might have an ASW profile that turns off certain range circles and keeps sonar and ASW weapons turned on.

The genesis of the idea is that I spend 10-15 minutes every sceanrio adjusting and changing all the settings to match the type of scenario or size of scenario.

[Graf Leinsdorf]

As already proposed in an other thread, I wonder whether with 1.11 or following some other improvements may be devised, especially in details of feedback after battle.
More often than not the player has troubles in discovering which platform has destroyed or damaged what, getting only the overall losses but not knowing which of his assets has achieved each one. This information doesn't seem to be got entirely through running message logs, where damage suffered is detailed but not the platform which caused it. Would it be possible to add a tag to the losses report with this kind of data? Or include it in lines of the message log?

[Sardaukar]

Request:

Changing simulation Stop/Start hotkey from F12 to spacebar. It'd be very convenient to many users, I'd think. Especially when on laptop F12 is vry small key.

[Gizzmoe]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Request:

Changing simulation Stop/Start hotkey from F12 to spacebar.

Yes, that would be very convenient.