Matrix Games Forums

Maybe I missed it but how about
1. Eng. units that can build Ports, Air Fields, reguler terrain to trail, upgrade to road, upgrade to hiway, etc.
2. MI units that can ID enemy units within X hexes
3. Editable recon capability
4. New Terrain - Mangrove swamps, swamps (or combinable forest and marsh), Combinable Mountain and Forest/Jungle (where I live mountains are covered with trees), Villages (rural), Rice Paddies, Orchards, Plantation (tea/rubber etc)
5. Naval Helicopter Capability

More Later

Sorry to post this here, but it's important.

America stopped being a free country today. Obama just failed to veto Congress' bill giving the military the power to detain -- indefinitely, without trial -- anyone they suspect of terrorism.

Inside the US, or out. Citizen or no. They need never justify their decision. Pop you into the hatch, and that'll be that.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Sorry to post this here, but it's important.

America stopped being a free country today. Obama just failed to veto Congress' bill giving the military the power to detain -- indefinitely, without trial -- anyone they suspect of terrorism.

Inside the US, or out. Citizen or no. They need never justify their decision. Pop you into the hatch, and that'll be that.

There's even far worst things brewing in governments corridors, and not only in the US.

They are afraid.

The definition of 'terrorism' is very broad, and includes any act that would cost major corporations money. Beware the whistleblowers and lawsuit bringers.

Oh, great! Let's get the Comprehensive Wishlist thread locked!

You know political discussion is not permitted on this board. Take this somewhere else.

In this thread or on this board?

The execution of OBL has been frenetically celebrated on this board. Why not mourn the death of the American Republic?

ORIGINAL: Telumar

In this thread or on this board?

The execution of OBL has been frenetically celebrated on this board. Why not mourn the death of the American Republic?

I'm not the monitor. But I don't want this thread to get locked. If he had opened his own thread I wouldn't have said anything. Someone else might, but I wouldn't.

Attached is a zip file containing the wishlist document that Jarek Flis and I have been developing for months. It was developed by collecting the wishes expressed here, there, and everywhere. We've tried to be comprehensive, but, in spite of the label, that is unattainable. We'll try to continue to maintain it as more issues are raised. Hopefully, this will reduce the repetitive posting of the same wishes over and over.

It's very important that everyone understand that this document is totally unofficial. Be sure to read and understand the disclaimer it contains and repeated here:

Disclaimer: This document contains only a collection of WISHES made by anyone and everyone, and is not a commitment by Matrix Games or anyone else to implement anything contained herein.

January 1, 2012: Version 12 posted.

Note: I'm not able to delete the version 10 document attached to post #1 of this thread or the version 11 document posted in post #1378. Just ignore them till I can get it fixed - if ever. The version in this post is the latest version.

Note that items in red are new. Items in blue have been implemented.

Note: Those of you that don't have Word can still download a free Word viewer here:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

...

Wishlist:

Give the heavy weapons icon(s) the ranged support (ie artillery) capability.

and clarification:

I'm not saying HW units should be classified as arty - because with the exception of mortars they are largely direct fire weapons. It's the ranged support aspect that should allow them to indirectly participate in combat as HQ's currently can. This also presupposes average effective ranges of about 3,000 m

There are currently 6 heavy weapons icons - 2 armor (heavy tank & heavy SP AT) and 4 other (inf, mountain inf, motorized inf, mountain cav, and airmobile inf). The armor could be negotiable as that might be a can of worms differentiating HE indirect fire (and only if that AFV was capable) with ranges out to 10 km or more. But I think giving infantry HW a standoff capability would enhance realism. At smaller scales (1 or 2.5 km/hex) this might translate into a 2 hex range and allow HW units to be placed behind frontline units which intuitively just seems more appropriate.

ORIGINAL: Grognard

Wishlist:

Give the heavy weapons icon(s) the ranged support (ie artillery) capability.

and clarification:

I'm not saying HW units should be classified as arty - because with the exception of mortars they are largely direct fire weapons. It's the ranged support aspect that should allow them to indirectly participate in combat as HQ's currently can. This also presupposes average effective ranges of about 3,000 m

There are currently 6 heavy weapons icons - 2 armor (heavy tank & heavy SP AT) and 4 other (inf, mountain inf, motorized inf, mountain cav, and airmobile inf). The armor could be negotiable as that might be a can of worms differentiating HE indirect fire (and only if that AFV was capable) with ranges out to 10 km or more. But I think giving infantry HW a standoff capability would enhance realism. At smaller scales (1 or 2.5 km/hex) this might translate into a 2 hex range and allow HW units to be placed behind frontline units which intuitively just seems more appropriate.

See item 4.16 in the Wishlist.

Thank you Bob. I scanned the wishlist prior to posting but missed this. Sorry.

What, or how, would the secondary icon or its effect be represented in the interface?

BTW - I finally scavanged enough change from under the cushions in my sofa to buy the game and updated to 3.4. The first scenario I immediately dove into was CFNA (3). Boy howdy it's a very different (and better) game all 'round - Elmer is considerably improved. But the Tobruk minefields are giving me fits!
Did you want them to be able to attack (not just defend) with such brutal effectiveness? A single minefield attack on one unit or a green stack is producing 25-30% casualties. However, I'll still be in Cairo before turn 70. [;)]

One more observation: I'm getting a lot more RBC's (for and against) involving relatively strong defenders - surprisingly so. E.g. - the 3-7 Polish Armored Cav pushed my 13-16 2nd MG Bn around. It was > 70% supply/ready. I RBC'd a green 4-8 Aus Inf bn to elimination with an Italian 7-12 Mech.
Just sayin'

ORIGINAL: Grognard

Thank you Bob. I scanned the wishlist prior to posting but missed this. Sorry.

What, or how, would the secondary icon or its effect be represented in the interface?

It would only be visible in the Force Editor. The Primary Icon would show in the game. But their effects would be combined.

BTW - I finally scavanged enough change from under the cushions in my sofa to buy the game and updated to 3.4. The first scenario I immediately dove into was CFNA (3). Boy howdy it's a very different (and better) game all 'round - Elmer is considerably improved. But the Tobruk minefields are giving me fits!
Did you want them to be able to attack (not just defend) with such brutal effectiveness? A single minefield attack on one unit or a green stack is producing 25-30% casualties. However, I'll still be in Cairo before turn 70. [;)]

Yeah, that's the thing - even the PO can still take Tobruk early. I figure, if you're sitting in a minefield, enemy attacks will be more lethal.

One more observation: I'm getting a lot more RBC's (for and against) involving relatively strong defenders - surprisingly so. E.g. - the 3-7 Polish Armored Cav pushed my 13-16 2nd MG Bn around. It was > 70% supply/ready. I RBC'd a green 4-8 Aus Inf bn to elimination with an Italian 7-12 Mech.
Just sayin'

Machineguns may be passive equipment, as I recall. You have to have a minimum of 4:1 odds to have any chance of RBC. But passive equipment doesn't count in the odds determination. Not sure about the Aussies - there's probably some of that that is passive, but I wouldn't have expected much.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Note: Those of you that don't have Word can still download a free Word viewer here:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

When I click on this link it takes me to a blank page.

Downloading this:

http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/de ... ng=en&id=4

Leads to this:

" PK zPž?? *£ ‚ Comprehensive Wishlist v12.docìý ˜$YY/ŒG3¬B1 È&AÃôdAVVW/³4 ..."

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Note: Those of you that don't have Word can still download a free Word viewer here:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

When I click on this link it takes me to a blank page.

Try this link:

http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file/f ... ption.html

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Note: Those of you that don't have Word can still download a free Word viewer here:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

When I click on this link it takes me to a blank page.

Try this link:

http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file/f ... ption.html

"PK zPž?? *£ ‚ - Comprehensive Wishlist v12.docìý ˜$YY/ŒG3B1 È&AÃôdAVVW/³4
Z½M7L/ÓÕ3
ÈbTfTULgf$ ™]]£ŸÈEÙD¼t ÍU e»× ?E Q QYD@v \Ø v˜ïý½Ë9'"³º‹-|îÿù?_c8•±œõ=ï¾üÃßßíS/yí}? Uþ="º(úá-wŠn-Ü»-]oÙ¤?.‰¢?§¿ñó‡·Ür
n½‘~¼‰®?£ëÍtÝòÿýûÿùÿõŠ¿ˆ- Ý [{÷·¹?•ÍþûÜ&ºk4ãü?_?ñõ ÑÈ¿;Ýö^ÑOï¸(zîÕ›øúÃ;Þfô¥àß-·\|Þ¿íßãùÿ¿æ‘ûoø÷zÿýÉ …¿ºíùÿÛ¢ÿÖn E¿ºÉ߿Ͻ¢è ô{éNòû|ÿÝó ãÿû‰{F ÖãS÷”ß ùïCè¿Ë÷Ž¢oPÿ'ï E7ÑoZäH_)ý³y[Õë?Ëþ‹vñïïõwu=m~ö ¿? Ü·ïªÿEû»¢Ñvª¿?1nRÑè>?oßÃõÆ?ŒãÔ üxöÝ=Šn ÿž¡ç?7æû
ýgýÙ|^I¨ò-Øð‡]ý»wùë÷nªÎãÿ¡ñ £ÿ¾Ÿ¾»Kµ±ÿkÿö 9tôؾ û..."

Colin,

send me an email and you get the wish list as .pdf. Not sure why the free word viewer ain't work.

Klink, Oberst

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

Colin,

send me an email and you get the wish list as .pdf. Not sure why the free word viewer ain't work.

Klink, Oberst

Downloaded both versions and installed. On the four different machines I have it works great. My guess is it isn't a Word Viewer problem.

ORIGINAL: Panama

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

Colin,

send me an email and you get the wish list as .pdf. Not sure why the free word viewer ain't work.

Klink, Oberst

Downloaded both versions and installed. On the four different machines I have it works great. My guess is it isn't a Word Viewer problem.

Thank God for Oberst's offer. My guess -- amply confirmed -- is that I've already sunk considerably more time into this problem than I'd wish to. We'll work on getting the boat ready for the next fishing trip, mapping more of the Sahara, actually depositing that rent check, seeing if the car is persisting in its oil leak, making sure we don't miss any good wines passing through Trader Joe's, plotting our eventual escape to Kuaui, finishing the deck so as to shut up the wife -- but not making frigging computers do something they clearly don't want to do.