Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Dimitris
...the ability to merge scenarios...

Sorry, what does this mean?

From PE v1.14.5 announcement:

New scenario editor feature: merge multiple scenarios. This brand-new feature allows bringing together multiple scenario files and combining their elements into a single scenario. This ability can be leveraged in a number of creative ways; for example, storing the ORBATs, properties and regular missions (patrols etc.) of entire sides in template scenarios and then merging them to produce the actual working scenario. It also allows multiple persons to collaborate on different parts of a scenario before integrating them, thus boosting production & analysis throughput.

It's probably the same idea in....Command v2. [:)]

From PE v1.14.5 announcement:

quote:New scenario editor feature: merge multiple scenarios. This brand-new feature allows bringing together multiple scenario files and combining their elements into a single scenario. This ability can be leveraged in a number of creative ways; for example, storing the ORBATs, properties and regular missions (patrols etc.) of entire sides in template scenarios and then merging them to produce the actual working scenario. It also allows multiple persons to collaborate on different parts of a scenario before integrating them, thus boosting production & analysis throughput.

It's probably the same idea in....Command v2.

That would be fantastic! Very nice.

My impressions on Command Modern Operations so far?

It's destined to be bigger and better than the original! Especially with the TAC-View and with the ground operations getting a big ol' boost! Though would I have to get a license for the PE features and pay for that as well?

And what's more, owners of the first game'll get a discount! Though that does bring me to my first question. Is the discount for Matrix Games and/or Steam users?

Could dynamic campaigns be in the cards? The kind that are determined by the kind of success in one mission that carries over to the next?

And combining multiple scenario files into one and their properties? Sounds like a Falcon 4.0-styled campaign scenario to me...

Would I be answering my own question if Platform creation wasn't available?

I have a question to tack onto one asked earlier: Since the ground model has improved so much, will we be able to carry and reload ammunition in the field? Anyone who has had a big tank battle in CMANO can attest to the lack of fire discipline and ammo conservation with tanks.

will we be able to carry and reload ammunition in the field?

You can do that now by grouping the land units with a magazine and locking the units to not move away from it. But lets hope the fire discipline is improved.

This time around we are also including several features that were previously PE-only (Support for real-time streaming to Tacview, the LOS tool, the ability to merge scenarios, and customizable aircraft formations). However, the other PE-only features remain PE-only.

Oh, I'm sorry. Those other PE-only features (such as platform creation) would remain as such. The Tacview, LOS tool, scenario-merging and customizable aircraft formations are included in the consumer release - I getcha.

Fantastic news, looking forward to it!

ORIGINAL: LORDPrometheus
...

ORIGINAL: Filitch
...

I'm guessing it means you won't have immediate real time communications with a submerged submarine and will instead get real time if they are close to the surface and can use SATCOM or slow comms replicating the slow low bandwidth of the ultra low frequency radio that they use to talk to submerged subs.

This does bring up the question or just how communications will work when they can be so readily disrupted. I worry it may turn subs into platforms that you just set on a mission and forget about because you can't directly control them. I guess a possible mechanic is to allow you to select a unit as your command platform and get full real-time from it and then delayed or disrupted comms from the rest

We don't necessarily need a command unit - just an ability to talk to "back home" via sat. Or if no sat capability, be in comms with a unit that has. However, the ability to share situation awareness/targetting information should depend on open comms i.e. disruption would prevent this. So an out-of-comms sub may detect an enemy, but can't share this info without going to PD and risking detection. On its mission (with whatever doctrine) it may well attack the enemy autonomously, though. Similar restrictions could apply to surface/air units which are out-of-comms for some reason.

If you've ever played the Combat Mission games, they do battlefield comms quite well - as player you are aware where enemies are if detected by any friendly unit, but to any one unit they may not be targettable unless directly observed. Only certain units can perform indirect fire or provide suitable targetting info. However, there are no missions or non-reactive autonomy, and all friendly units are always visible.

Similarly a recent CMANO update means an AEW plane may detect an enemy using its search radar and share that info, but can't supply targetting data to another unit; an interceptor must use its own fire control radar to guide a missile to target.

Comms restrictions imply that an out-of-comms (with home) unit should not reveal on the map any enemy it detects until it's back in comms - not even reveal if it's going offensive/defensive. As such it makes sense that subs should periodically get back in comms, and new doctrines may be required e.g. to report an enemy detection if used as a picket.

That also means that out-of-comms friendly units should disappear from the map or be replaced by "estimates", unless they're detected by other in-comms friendly units.

Edit:
Of course, for pre-satellite era scenarios having a command vessel would make a lot of sense!

A new question, if I may...

Will specific ground units require fuel like tanks or jeeps?

EDIT: And will certain vehicles have defensive measures like reactive armor and defense systems like the Trophy?

You bring up a good point. Will there be a more detailed armor and health system for ground units? In CMANO there is a very basic armor system that is limited to being usable by structures mostly and damage is mantle done via flat values with some weapons having penetrator traits. What would be nice to see especially with the improved ground combat is more specific armor details for ground units such that a tank can survive lots of shells to the front (depending on type of course) but a single hellfire to the top will knock it out. This will also reduce the current ability of a .50 cal being able to kill a building with enough bullets

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

This time around we are also including several features that were previously PE-only (Support for real-time streaming to Tacview, the LOS tool, the ability to merge scenarios, and customizable aircraft formations). However, the other PE-only features remain PE-only.

I could see this being a massive step forward for increasing the realism of air combat.

Will it also add the ability to create formations of different aircraft types and load outs?

Awesome news! Maybe can give reviews at Rocks, Papers, Shotguns!

Meanwhile, I suppose platform creation won't be in the consumer version of the game?

And are dynamic campaigns a possibility as well? The kind I stated where one success would determine the advantages or disadvantages you'd get in the next one?

ORIGINAL: ProdigyofMilitaryPride

Meanwhile, I suppose platform creation won't be in the consumer version of the game?

And are dynamic campaigns a possibility as well? The kind I stated where one success would determine the advantages or disadvantages you'd get in the next one?

Every large enough Command scenario (one in which the player has enough time and resources to plan and execute multiple missions, that is) is effectively a self-contained dynamic campaign.

ORIGINAL: ProdigyofMilitaryPride

Meanwhile, I suppose platform creation won't be in the consumer version of the game?

And are dynamic campaigns a possibility as well? The kind I stated where one success would determine the advantages or disadvantages you'd get in the next one?

Since Lua K/Vs can be carried between scenarios in a campaign, this is already partially doable for dedicated scenario designers.

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: ProdigyofMilitaryPride
Meanwhile, I suppose platform creation won't be in the consumer version of the game?
And are dynamic campaigns a possibility as well? The kind I stated where one success would determine the advantages or disadvantages you'd get in the next one?

Every large enough Command scenario (one in which the player has enough time and resources to plan and execute multiple missions, that is) is effectively a self-contained dynamic campaign.

Now that is a fantastic idea!

Weather?

I spent months trying to get custom overlays to work but ran in to limitation regarding max sizes at high resolutions. Interest to see how detailed/good the new world generation will be as that would bring me back to the game in a heartbeat. Currently I just can't get immersed in the blurry textures and icons representing units, more screenshots please !

I'd like to reiterate a question I asked in another thread:
Will the new AI have behavior that can turn on/off radars to fend off ARMs, dynamic submarine dive/surfacing, etc.?

ORIGINAL: ProdigyofMilitaryPride

I'd like to reiterate a question I asked in another thread:
Will the new AI have behavior that can turn on/off radars to fend off ARMs, dynamic submarine dive/surfacing, etc.?

IIRC, there will the possibility to code new AIs through LUA, so we could get realistic IADS behaviours down the line.