peter's wish list

[pboiler]

in no particular order

 

1- MP

2- 1 more zone in the formation formation that does not have a range limit (for better long range patrols)

3- Easier ASW patrols with auto SB drops/dipping sonar use

4- Ability to set paths or areas of coverage for patrols and not be limited to patrols fling to just 1 point, loiter, and then return.

5- model for USV, UUV

6- easier scrolling on map (instead of having to use scroll bar- similar to googlemaps, mapquest, etc)

7- Ability to set sensors on/off and altitude when setting up patrols/formation

8- Easier aerial refueling- be able to have tanker and the plane needing refueling to automatically take best course get close enough to refuel

9- Also and similar- if wanting to join different groups to be able to have the groups automatically move towards each other to be close enough for them to join.

10- Different levels of ESM capability for different platforms/sensors- ie different rates that a particular platform is able detect other sensors/platforms and different rates that a particular emitting platforms/sensor will be detected by other platforms

11- different rates of being able to shoot down a weapon- based on the weapons size, speed, maneuverability, etc

12- ability for a weapon to loiter looking for a target

13- waypoints for missiles

14- a lot of these are ways to minimize the need to micromanage every unit- any other changes to help with this would be nice

15- smarter AI

16- Different sized aircraft occupying different amount of a ship's space. For example, a ship may be able to handle 1 large helicopter or alternatively 2 smaller UAV's. As it is now a ScanEagle is equivalent to a Hawkeye in a ships aircraft capacity.

17- when setting air patrols (and possibly also with ships/subs)in the formation editor having the option of picking the individual patrol's altitude and sensor status. Then in the GE having an option box when setting group sensors that can be clicked if you want this to override this. This would make it easier to optimize the groups patrol/sensor coverage. As it is now I almost always have my AEW outside of the formation with sensors on with the rest of the group quiet.

18- similar to #6--> an interactive way to be able to progressively zoom in/out on the map in addition to the the fixed 2x, 4x, ... options

19- having the full country name displayed when adding a base in scenario editor.

 

addition to 8- make it easier/possible for the AI to use aerial tankers.

 

 

 

 

thanks again! great game!

[TonyE]

Thank you for typing up your list! Your timing is excellent as well as we look towards changing some of the game structure to accomodate such requests.

[TonyE]

Wishes 1-15 noted for the big redesign.

[pboiler]

Just thought of another...

 

Different sized aircraft occupying different amount of a ship's space. For example, a ship may be able to handle 1 large helicopter or alternatively 2 smaller UAV's. As it is now a ScanEagle is equivalent to a Hawkeye in a ships aircraft capacity.

[Warhorse64]

Just thought of another...

 

Different sized aircraft occupying different amount of a ship's space. For example, a ship may be able to handle 1 large helicopter or alternatively 2 smaller UAV's. As it is now a ScanEagle is equivalent to a Hawkeye in a ships aircraft capacity.

 

 

Hmmm ... That brings up an interesting question: how do you determine the capacity of the ship? Obviously, flight deck / hangar space is a consideration, but is it the dominant one? How about maintenance requirements? Two UAVs aren't much better than one helo if you only have enough mechanics to keep one of them in the air. What about fuel and spares capacity? Can the ship carry enough of each to support the two UAVs? Does any of that matter, as far as the game goes? Just thinking out loud ...

[TonyE]

Keep thinking (especially out loud)

 

The value of space is a hot topic in our beta team logistics development thread right now (specifically whether having a single 'cost' number is sufficient for weapons stored on an AOE or whether there must be a second number splitting cost into a monetary cost and a space cost).

 

I'm still leaning towards a single number but that doesn't much help the aircraft capacity question. I think the paper rules give us some guidance as to what might be done in terms of a basic rule on how many Small or VSmall aircraft can fit in the same space as a Large or VLarge aircraft.

 

My thoughts on spares capacity is that it is outside the scope of HC as well as maintenance in many ways (though I am all for more varied ready times).

 

Anyway, don't mind me, carry on the discussion

 

oh, pboiler, please add that new wish also to the first post in the thread (as number 16) so that it doesn't get lost when I'm looking thru the lists in the future. Thanks!

[pboiler]

Keep thinking (especially out loud)

 

The value of space is a hot topic in our beta team logistics development thread right now (specifically whether having a single 'cost' number is sufficient for weapons stored on an AOE or whether there must be a second number splitting cost into a monetary cost and a space cost).

 

I'm still leaning towards a single number but that doesn't much help the aircraft capacity question. I think the paper rules give us some guidance as to what might be done in terms of a basic rule on how many Small or VSmall aircraft can fit in the same space as a Large or VLarge aircraft.

 

My thoughts on spares capacity is that it is outside the scope of HC as well as maintenance in many ways (though I am all for more varied ready times).

 

Anyway, don't mind me, carry on the discussion

 

oh, pboiler, please add that new wish also to the first post in the thread (as number 16) so that it doesn't get lost when I'm looking thru the lists in the future. Thanks!

 

Thanks, I'll add it to the 1st post.

[pboiler]

added 17

[pboiler]

added 18

[TonyE]

Hehe, #19 was very polite. We just really need a 32-bit scenario editor instead our 16-bit beast of burden (when the databases started getting large we hit the limit of text in the list so countries get the axe more than the other fields). There is hope, just not immediately.

[TonyE]

Wishes 16 thru 19 added to master wish list

[pboiler]

Additions:

 

20. -ability to have different capabilities of ESM, not just a flag to either have it or not.

21. -different probability of detect of platforms, radars, etc. by ESM.

Edited June 27, 2011 by TonyE
numbered to make summary easier

[gkm]

Hehe, #19 was very polite. We just really need a 32-bit scenario editor instead our 16-bit beast of burden (when the databases started getting large we hit the limit of text in the list so countries get the axe more than the other fields). There is hope, just not immediately.

On my custom database (a monster in progress) I have been disregarding the country field, and instead using a two letter country code, a period delimiter, and the name. Example: AO. Luanda - Luanda, Angola.

ZA.Johannesburg - Johannesburg, South Africa. Two letter codes are standard internet codes, and can be easily found on the CIA Factbook.