RUNNING POLL - gameplay features [Feature Requests Go Here]

[Tiramisu]

Oops... thank you!

[KnightHawk75]

ORIGINAL: Tiramisu

I have many wishes, but for now I will make only a humble wish: Please add navigation buttons "back" and "forward" for the database page! A menu option for opening the mission briefing window would be also nice.

This really would be a nice addition (even if it were only just say 2-3 levels back\forward), it's something that smacks me in the face constantly as a frustration and time sync. I get something like this is probably not high on the priority list but it would be a very welcome addition in my view.

[Glenn Beasley]

I would like to see "Kill" markings on individual A/C,Subs,Ships,AAA,SAM"s etc,I think it would be a nice enhancement to the Sim Scenarios

[Marder]

I would like to be able to draw permanent lines on the map.
For example, for the drawing of possible opponent courses.

Nice would be an option for compact datablocks with just the unit name.
(e.g. 4th option under "Map Settings -> Datablocks": All (compact))
That would just help beginners to have a better overview of the overall situation.

[TitaniumTrout]

Could you please add a subsurface DB entry for "False Contact - Magnetic"?

Thanks!

[AKar]

What I'd like to have as an important, gameplay affecting addition would be accidents. Weapon malfunctions are already there, but having a real non-zero chance of losing airplanes in particular for mishaps would add something to the planning. Obviously, the model should be sensitive to the conditions: attempting something like NoE flying at high speed in poor weather with aircraft not well suited to it should carry significantly elevated risk of something going wrong in comparison to cruising at 35000 ft. Operations such as in-flight refueling should be something in between.

Thinking out loud. Accidents do account for a significant portion of the losses in real ops.

[TitaniumTrout]

I'd love to see a "safety" for creating scenarios. I recently made a bunch of changes to a scenario, tested it, and accidentally clicked 'Save' instead of 'Save As'. This overwrote the original start time so I lost the opening 45 minutes of the scenario.





It would only be visible in the Scenario Editor. If you tried to save on accident it would give you a pop-up.



Additionally it would be cool to have it offer to return you to the scenario start.

Thanks guys!

[Gunner98]

accidentally clicked 'Save' instead of 'Save As'

I've only done that a couple hundred times!

[Primarchx]

I'll chime in again.

1) Would really like the LOS Tool from the Pro Version.
2) An in-game timer as it would be nice to stop the game at certain points based on elapsed time or clock time for things like submarine course changes and strike planning.
3) Lastly I'd like more info on current acoustic signatures. What are my platforms' self-noise levels per band at current speed? What is the dB strength of current passive contacts to detecting platforms per band? This would add a needed component to sub and ASW ops.

[tjhkkr]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

accidentally clicked 'Save' instead of 'Save As'

I've only done that a couple hundred times!

Amen to that. I would really love a 'do you really want to do this?' on the save.
I cannot tell you the number of times when testing a scenario I have done this...

[AlphaSierra]

Amen... Great Idea

[Rory Noonan]

ORIGINAL: AKar

What I'd like to have as an important, gameplay affecting addition would be accidents. Weapon malfunctions are already there, but having a real non-zero chance of losing airplanes in particular for mishaps would add something to the planning. Obviously, the model should be sensitive to the conditions: attempting something like NoE flying at high speed in poor weather with aircraft not well suited to it should carry significantly elevated risk of something going wrong in comparison to cruising at 35000 ft. Operations such as in-flight refueling should be something in between.

Thinking out loud. Accidents do account for a significant portion of the losses in real ops.

The tools are there for scenario designers to add this kind of behaviour via Lua. If you have a specific idea in mind post in the Lua Legion subforum and I'd be happy to talk through it with a demo.

I'm not saying it can't/won't be done, or even that it's not a good idea to incorporate into the general infrastructure (haven't formed an opinion on that actually [:)]); just that it's actually possible to do right now.

[Excroat3]

Requesting the ability to load weapons from ship's magazines into aircraft as cargo. Was recently playing through a scenario where my carrier ran out of AMRAAMs, but my LHD still had plenty. If I had the option to load some into cargo helicopters and ferry them over that would have been a game changer.

[AKar]

ORIGINAL: apache85

ORIGINAL: AKar

What I'd like to have as an important, gameplay affecting addition would be accidents. Weapon malfunctions are already there, but having a real non-zero chance of losing airplanes in particular for mishaps would add something to the planning. Obviously, the model should be sensitive to the conditions: attempting something like NoE flying at high speed in poor weather with aircraft not well suited to it should carry significantly elevated risk of something going wrong in comparison to cruising at 35000 ft. Operations such as in-flight refueling should be something in between.

Thinking out loud. Accidents do account for a significant portion of the losses in real ops.

The tools are there for scenario designers to add this kind of behaviour via Lua. If you have a specific idea in mind post in the Lua Legion subforum and I'd be happy to talk through it with a demo.

I'm not saying it can't/won't be done, or even that it's not a good idea to incorporate into the general infrastructure (haven't formed an opinion on that actually [:)]); just that it's actually possible to do right now.

Nothing specific in my mind in what comes to any particular scenario. What I'm actually thinking is similar option like the current ones, detailed gunfire, and aircraft damage, that would 'enable accidents'. If enabled, aircraft flying fast and very low over terrain would have elevated risk of crashing. More so if poorly equipped for such operations and if at night or in poor visibility. Of course, crew proficiency should affect this very much as well. This would add some value to the aircraft that are specifically equipped for low-lever, or even NoE flying and would carry a penalty in a form of added risk for using less suitable airplanes in such a way - in particular if crewed with novices.

As a result, a flight of Panavia Tornados with expert pilots could pull off an extended distance of minimum altitude flight even in poor conditions and over difficult terrain with just moderately elevated risk. Trying this with generic F-4s with novice crews would carry a risk that is elevated enough to seriously consider other options.

[BenTheVaporeon]

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

Requesting the ability to load weapons from ship's magazines into aircraft as cargo. Was recently playing through a scenario where my carrier ran out of AMRAAMs, but my LHD still had plenty. If I had the option to load some into cargo helicopters and ferry them over that would have been a game changer.

i also would like this idea if it means anything


... i kind of thought cargo missions were meant to do this, but they are more like landings


-----

as a side note, you can still move the weapons from one ship to another by making 2 separate 1 way ferry missions, and loading a plane with the desired weapons and then having it transfer to the other ship, and then switching to the "ferry" layout on the big carrier and then returning to the LHD , and then repeating the progress until the missiles have been transferred, although it takes a lot of time, and ties up fighter planes(probably harriers in this context), that could be used in other missions, and it makes more sense to use helicopters that are said to carry cargo(i still have to look up if they are used to carry supplies to ships or if only ships do that)

-------------

i looked it up now, helicopters Do help with moving weapons and supplies from cargo ships to warships

[Gunner98]

you can still move the weapons from one ship to another by making 2 separate 1 way ferry missions,

This is a viable means if there are no transport helos available but it is tedious and slow as you mention if there are cargo helos available.

A scenario designer can make missions work with Lua but cannot predict all things a player wants to do. You can fix this in the editor and be realistic about it:

As a simple rule of thumb you can take the cargo load of the Helo and make a simple spreadsheet to figure out how much to transfer:


1- The weight of each missile is listed in the DB

2- I add 10% for packaging and salvage material

3- I always round it off to two's of a munition as this is usualy how they are shipped and used.

4- Assume sling load so bulk should not be an issue


Set the appropriate loadout of the Helo, send it on a one way ferry mission, when it arrives go into the magazine of the old ship and deduct the appropriat number and add them to the new unit.


This is a bit of a pain but it is not difficult and you are not cheeting - so I think it is fair ball.

B

[BenTheVaporeon]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

you can still move the weapons from one ship to another by making 2 separate 1 way ferry missions,

This is a viable means if there are no transport helos available but it is tedious and slow as you mention if there are cargo helos available.

A scenario designer can make missions work with Lua but cannot predict all things a player wants to do. You can fix this in the editor and be realistic about it:

As a simple rule of thumb you can take the cargo load of the Helo and make a simple spreadsheet to figure out how much to transfer:


1- The weight of each missile is listed in the DB

2- I add 10% for packaging and salvage material

3- I always round it off to two's of a munition as this is usualy how they are shipped and used.

4- Assume sling load so bulk should not be an issue


Set the appropriate loadout of the Helo, send it on a one way ferry mission, when it arrives go into the magazine of the old ship and deduct the appropriat number and add them to the new unit.


This is a bit of a pain but it is not difficult and you are not cheeting - so I think it is fair ball.

B

maybe, but by the point were you would open it in the editor already changes the scenario a lot

i just mentioned the ferry method because it can be done during an already started scenario most of the time (assuming you still have the planes needed)

but still UNREPing with aircraft is a good feature to ask for, as it is done in RL, and would be very helpful in missions

[lumiere]

WARNING: This post is just vengeance for Paveway LGB or Hellfire missiles.

I suggest decoy for laser guided weapons, just like IR or rader-guided weapons.

My poor knowledge says it can, just like "Shtora-1" on T-80/T-90, or Type-90 (Japanese) tank with
laser warning receiver which could trigger smoke discharger.

Also, for naval vessel, pamphlet of Saab illustrates that laser warning receiver cues "countermeasure" (I don't know this means smoke discharger).

In game, this can be modeled using "Generic Smoke discharger" like flare or chaff just before resolving hit (tech level, i.e. incomplete combustion or white phosphorus is good).
also, unit with laser warning reciver (AN/AVR-2, for example), it could give crew a cue to evade and also works as decoy with infinity ammo.

here is example.

[font="Courier New"]Decoy (Shtora-1 [Smoke]; Tech: Late 1990s) from T-90 Tank Platoon is attempting to seduce sensor:
Laser Spot Tracker (Tech: Early 2000s)(Guiding weapon: AGM-114M Hellfire II #464). Final probability: 15%.
Result: 16 - FAILURE

Decoy (Shtora-1 [LWR]; Tech: Late 1990s) from T-90 Tank Platoon is attempting to seduce sensor:
Laser Spot Tracker (Tech: Early 2000s)(Guiding weapon: AGM-114M Hellfire II #464). Final probability: 5%.
Result: 4 - SUCCESS
[/font]

To tell the truth, I think smoke by fire or smoke from funnel of the ship with full/flank speed should also be considered, but
it will increases burden for devs and they are for next time...

References:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNmTmVP8brw

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/type_90.htm

https://saab.com/globalassets/commercia ... -sheet.pdf

https://www.nrl.navy.mil/content_images ... _Evans.pdf

https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=3lp ... er&f=false

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/an-avr-2.htm

[ARCNA442]

Could you please add the ability to have multiple Database Viewer windows open? This would massively improve quality of life when trying to compare different units, or when looking up details of different weapons carried by a unit.

[morphin]

ORIGINAL: ARCNA442

Could you please add the ability to have multiple Database Viewer windows open? This would massively improve quality of life when trying to compare different units, or when looking up details of different weapons carried by a unit.

Yes please [;)]

It is on top of the wishlist. Open window modal is only a setting. Not a big deal as i remmmember from my past programmer experience

Andy