Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: mikkey

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
... DD commander who has to spend 3-weeks on patrol off RVN doing NGFS or VBSS/whatever/etc. Or an FFG captain in the Tanker Wars for a month.

These are very interesting ideas for long time scenarios.

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

I'd be a bit hesitant to do something air-centric at the moment, until we get something like an aircraft maintenance effect system (not a full-fledged maintenance simulator, mind you, but something that allows the player to deal with delays/changes to air ops caused by maintenance issues). I've been a part of real-world air ops in the past and every day something happens to delay, abort or cause changes to an air campaign, even among the best airforces in the world. In other words, aircraft experience in-flight emergencies that require aborts, or random chances for maintenance failures/issues that disrupt the normal aircraft ops cycle - doesn't have to be detailed, but just like some kind of failure table that you roll against every time you launch an aircraft, modified against sortie rate (the more times you launch that aircraft without a maintenance stand-down, the more likely the failure) and maybe side proficiency (better air forces do better maintenance). There are reasons why a carrier in the real world only does X number of sorties a day when it could physically actually launch far more. And also reasons why beloved planes that are maintenance hogs (F-14) are retired before they are obsolete.

not sure if LUA scripting permits anything like that.

I'm sure the C:MANO devs have a plan to address all of this in the future. Hell, you could probably make a whole game out of just dealing with Air Tasking Orders for an air campaign (Flint 15 experiences IFE, has to divert. You failed to slot in a CSAR team to secure the aircraft at the divert location. Flint 15 is arrested by local authorities. Game over.)

ORIGINAL: Mini_Von

Here are a few ideas for increased scenario length. I think more units in a scenario will help lengthen the game.

Would it make sense to be able to filter (toggle ON/OFF) different unit types? We could add many more units per scenario without dragging the performance down.

Example: Maybe you could have 15 detailed airfields in the scenario but only display them when needed. I'm not sure if just having the units in the scenario decreases performance or if displaying them adds to the decrease in performance.

Or would it make sense to use groups for detailed airfields. 1 airfield icon (group view) could be toggled with a detailed (unit view) which would show all items attached to the airbase?

I am not a programmer and I have no idea if this might help, just throwing out some ideas.

ORIGINAL: Dysta

Actually, I have a huge military drama-esque, near-future (2020s) Nuclear Holocaust which is involved with two main characters from US and China, doing their own campaigns when their own commissioner/commissar died during the direct assault at western pacific sea, and both gone rogue to do their own objectives.

My estimated series of scenarios be around 6 to 8, with two different endings from player's decision. Each may last around 1-8w consider their logistics. Not just involved with lots of advance weapons (with customized weapon mounts and loadouts), but also some extremely unique asymmetrical tactics, some even breaking the Geneva Conventions to do much worse damages than expected.

And in between each chapters of scenarios will have text-only stories when not fighting, focusing on character developments and understand everything behind the war.

This might takes a year to finish because most of them will involved with huge amounts of units, scripts and such. I can propose the idea first to see if anyone is interested.

Nothing relateive to the recent war story called Ghost Fleet, or anything that bolster the fate and hegemony from both nations. They are just rogue admirals doing their own vengeances.