RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

[e2204588]

Could we have a mission altitude setting in mission editor?

1. Helicopter fly at maximum altitude and shot down by long range SAM.
2. CAS Aircraft fly at 40000ft, and can't find any ground target.

"AI aircraft should obey their loadout's flight profile" is nice but we really need a quicker solution.
[&o]

[Veracity]

I've been looking for a TOT and TOS function ever since the first build. Imho it's the most important feature currently missing. I am having great fun with the sim though. It has amazing potential and I'm looking forward to it's evolution. Cheers.

[JCR]

Another feature.
Scrub/replace missions via events like:
Trigger: CVA America damaged 20%
Action: trigger mission "get the hell out of here" (transit mission to Norfolk, VA)

[Dimitris]

Added ability to disable map-cursor info box (aka big black box of data).

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: JCR
Another feature.
Scrub/replace missions via events like:
Trigger: CVA America damaged 20%
Action: trigger mission "get the hell out of here" (transit mission to Norfolk, VA)

IIRC you can already do this. Just create an event combining a "unit damaged" trigger with a "change mission status" action.

[Dimitris]

Removed "Make it possible to quick-jump on units/locations" as it has been implemented in Build 462. If you voted for this you can now re-vote.

[deepdive]

Thank you all Dev`s, for Your game improvements, wery impressive. but there is one serious button missing on sidebar ,

"HOLD FIRE/WEAPONS FREE" button for selected unit/Group.

All Helicopters should have RESCUE or S.A.R loudout, if capable for it.

All large AC should have an Nav/weather radar in the nose.

Is it possible to to have the ability to preset flight altitude on mission editor?

Bjørn

[JohnSmith]

Unit Embark/Disembark from transport units, without using teleport would be great. Paradrops etc.

What I'm finding slightly disadvantageous is that, if I want to create a Recce mission, with the use of an SF platoon. I have to create the events to allow the RHIB to enter a defined area and then teleport the SF units. However there is a serious lack of flexibility in that the player is restrained to inserting those units in only one area unless i make several areas cluttering the map with RPs. There should be a simple mission in the mission planner to chose an insertion point, and plot the route and the units will disembark. That is my suggestion, or something along those lines to allow more player control.

Creating the balance between player freedom and scenario events is vital I think. There's no point in having the the scenario instructions telling the player how to conduct his mission completely, otherwise what's the point.

[Agathosdaimon]

IS There any chance some further event editor options can be added ie, changing to a new mission and or change of weather state (overall and or in just a certain area) - the possibility to have new missions triggered for the ai could add a great wealth of depth and dynamism to scenarios

[Dimitris]

See our separate ScenEdit poll.

[coolts]

I'm surprised more people not voting for TOT/TOS. What's more important to mission execution? Having your weapons in the right place at the right time, or having a few beeps and burps coming from your speakers?

Democracy eh? [:D]

[chelu]

I think that refining the air combat evasion is really important. It should also include missile performance againts aircraft or other missiles. Sometimes the number of missiles fired is really high, like three f-16 firing at one su30 two amraam each... And the su30 evades all amraams! There are several scenarios with this situation.

[Dimitris]

Okay, this is starting to get annoying.

Guys, it's not simply "the Su-30 evaded all 6 AMRAAMs".

Without seeing the message log (which is essential for such a discussion), I would guess that some of them were spoofed, some were jammed, some were evaded, maybe a couple were outrun etc. etc.

You guys have to stop treating AAW missiles with such reverence. AAMs (and SAMs) in combat _miss all the time_. They are jammed, spoofed, blinded, decoyed, out-turned, outrun, and soon they'll start getting fried mid-air by DEWs. The West's most advanced in-service BVR missile (AMRAAM) has a 55% combat kill rate against mostly obsolete aircraft, and it has never been employed against modern countermeasures. Think about that for a moment. Against a modern fighter with state-of-the-art DECM? Good luck.

We are aware that there is still the issue of aircraft retaining their energy reserves after successive evasions in the game, but anyone thinking that getting this fixed will, on its own, drastically alter the kill ratios against modern adversaries, is in for a rude shock.

Now that B460 is out, try this test: Pick that Su-30 (it's a modern variant, right?) and slide the proficiency bar all the way down to novice. Then throw all the AMRAAMs you want at it. Save the message log, and notice how many of the misses were due to kinematic evasion and how many were due to electronic or other countermeasures.

If you want to argue that DECM may be too effective, or that chaff/flares are overmodeled, fine. Let's get into that. We're not perfect and our models probably aren't either. But this whole "aircraft are super-evasive!!!!" thing has been blown out of every possible proportion.

We're long past the age of "I'll hit the brakes and he'll fly right by", guys. Kurt Plummer is right. Better bullets win.

[riflebrigade]

Would it be possible to be able to enter a Proficiency level for each unit?

[Dimitris]

Added.

[El Savior]

If I remember correct in Vietnam war only about 5% of SAM missiles actually hit target. I'm happy how the missiles hit or do not hit targets. Of course it is sometimes frustrating to see how often my carefully planned attacks fail. Log is good and explains a lot why missile did not hit.

In my current 1983 scenario USSR vs. USA carrier task force I found out how good F-14 Tomcats are with their long-range AA-missiles. Only MiG-31 seem to be good enough against them. Thankfully Soviets did have many fighters to encounter American forces. [:D]

[thbrix]

Me too! I thought that wish would sky rocket, because it really puzzles me how in earth you are able to coordinate anything without it???

Maybe because there is more interest towards naval than air?

Well i just hope the feature arrives at some time...

ORIGINAL: coolts

I'm surprised more people not voting for TOT/TOS. What's more important to mission execution? Having your weapons in the right place at the right time, or having a few beeps and burps coming from your speakers?

Democracy eh? [:D]

[Agathosdaimon]

i think TOT is extremly important too but perhaps there are a few reasons why it is not polling higher:

- it appeared later in the poll and so many may have already selected an earlier option, but who would rather select TOT planner
- the name TOT Planner should be changed to at least 'Time of Target planner' - people may not know what TOT Planner is and so just go for the more obvious things like sound effects, which i dont personally think are so important as TOT planner

[JCR]

In order to have bombers survive nukes, could the AI do a post-target-turn (PTT) when carrying nukes?
Immidiately break away after release, like it was SAC doctrine?

[RoryAndersonCDT]

ORIGINAL: JCR

In order to have bombers survive nukes, could the AI do a post-target-turn (PTT) when carrying nukes?
Immidiately break away after release, like it was SAC doctrine?

[:D] Might be an idea for Engaged Defensive to take into account imminent nuclear weapons detonation.