The "Uber" Command: Modern Air/Naval Ops Thread

[mikeck]

Is there a way to get it to run "full screen"? When I play, I still have the windows task bar along the bottom. Isn't it like "alt+enter" or something?

[Grim.Reaper]

You see this trailer...

Thats the sounds and music the game needs! :)

That is a very good video and there have been some very good AAR's released too......however, I have a question to everyone that has been playing it.  First, I have to admit I was in the early beta for the game, but life and other things got in the way where I could not participate much and really did not get much of chance to play it...never kept up with all the updates so haven't played the release version yet.

Now for the question and this doesn't necessarily just apply to this game, but we will use it as an example.  I always like watching videos of gameplay and also reading people's AAR's...a lot of those people have tremendous talent in telling a story as they play a game.  After reviewing these items, I get fired up and think I will get the same enjoyment out of the games, but in the end, I typically don't get the same outcome.  It seems I am excited about the story that is being told and somehow the game itself will give me the same immersion.  But then I open up the game and I see a bunch of circles, squares, lines shooting at each other, and I think to myself, where did all that immersion go?  Was I more interested in people telling stories than the gameplay itself?

It seems for some games you really have to have an active imagination to make it immersive versus what the actual game actually produces...if you try and play the game without it, seems the enjoyment falls flat.

So my question to those playing this game, are you finding it immersive and entertaining as the videos and AARs would make you believe?  Does the gameplay help tell a believable story on its own or is your own active mind a must to really maximize the enjoyment?

[Jarhead0331]

Speaking in terms of an visual/auditory experience, I find that trailer somewhat misleading and deceptive, and that is putting it nicely.  There are none of those sounds, pop-up windows, radio comms, etc. in the game.  That is not to say that playing the game cannot be intense and immersive.  But it is not a visual/auditory treat in the least...that being said, nobody ever advertised it as such.  The game simulates exactly what the developers said it would, and it is at the top of the food chain when it comes to modern naval strategic simulation.

[mirth]

Speaking in terms of an visual/auditory experience, I find that trailer somewhat misleading and deceptive, and that is putting it nicely.  There are none of those sounds, pop-up windows, radio comms, etc. in the game.  That is not to say that playing the game cannot be intense and immersive.  But it is not a visual/auditory treat in the least...that being said, nobody ever advertised it as such.  The game simulates exactly what the developers said it would, and it is at the top of the food chain when it comes to modern naval strategic simulation.

Those things crossed my mind too when I watched that video. Not really the best way to advertise what the game truly has to offer, imho.

[Nefaro]

Just a question.  Are there hot key commands that don't have an on-screen button counterpart? 
That is my pet peeve.  The best UI's does not require people to memorize hot keys.
And for each on-screen button, there should be a tool tip.

There's at least one that I can't find, Unassign, which clears current orders for selected unit - something I'm having to do regularly.  I wanted a hotkey list because there are probably more hotkey orders I'd be using, but I've not investigated them.  Besides, you don't have to memorize them all if there's a Hotkey list in-game.

Right now I'm becoming rather frustrated with the poor perfomance of Command on both my computers.  The cause isn't anything clear cut but it's dragging my experience down.  Some of the shortcomings with the interface, many of which JD mentioned, is adding to this feeling like it's a needless chore to track individual unit-specific info without having to sort through OOB, hangar, or scenario database lists.  There are also some occasional 'assistant' AI oddities getting in the way, such as when I couldn't get some of my aircraft to RTB for more than a couple seconds at a time.   I also can't help but recall some of the useful interface options from ye olde Harpoon games, such as being able to create a surface group formation for the purpose of posting an ASW helo patrol on-station (for example), even if there's only one ship in this group.  There are still usability features like this that are missing.  Add to all this the almost non-existant sound and no database pics/art and it feels unfinished in other areas, too.

Hopefully all this stuff gets addressed before long.  With the team's dedication, it likely will at some point.  But I'm having doubts whether adopting this title at release has been instant gratification from the start.  I think it needs more UI work, along with a focus on the usual release issues such as compatibility/performance.

[panzerde]

I re-ran the first tutorial tonight with an eye toward really allocating air missions in such a way as to coordinate an effective alpha strike rather than just to learn the basics of the game.  I was able to pretty efficiently plot courses to move groups of aircraft to multiple different points surrounding the target area, and once on station, set up the appropriate missions to be able to suppress the AD and subsequently launch effective strikes against multiple targets. 

It was great fun, but I did run across a few UI and gameplay issues that I hope get addressed.  JD and Nefaro have covered most of these I suspect, but here's my 2 cents:

• My biggest gritch is that the OOB window doesn't auto update.  The OOB is a great quick tool for selecting groups quickly, but I have to keep closing and reopening it to get it to be current.
• Windows really, really, really need to either be sized to display all content when first opened, and/or they need to retain their size once I've sized them.
• Having the 1/3 Option checked by default makes me a sad panda.  I continually sending out missions that are under strength because of it.
• I turned on the game sounds.  Game sounds really can add to immersion.  I'm turning these back off.  ;)

Now, having said the above, let me clarify that this has quickly landed in my top three favorite games, ever.  I will play the crap out of this.  This is right up there with Command Ops in terms of both realism and and the ability to play the role of a commander rather than micromanage. 

So far, I'm not running into performance issues, so I'm not experiencing some of the frustrations others have mentioned.  I'll be interested to see what happens with a larger scenario. 

[bostonmyk]

• My biggest gritch is that the OOB window doesn't auto update.  The OOB is a great quick tool for selecting groups quickly, but I have to keep closing and reopening it to get it to be current.
• Windows really, really, really need to either be sized to display all content when first opened, and/or they need to retain their size once I've sized them.
• Having the 1/3 Option checked by default makes me a sad panda.  I continually sending out missions that are under strength because of it.
• I turned on the game sounds.  Game sounds really can add to immersion.  I'm turning these back off.  ;)

Logged OOB window issue. Doesn't seem like a tall order.
Updated an existing request to remember windows sizing settings (2 requests so far for that).
1/3 rule is a tough one as its commonly used with Patrol Missions. If there's a delta we'll likely get a request the other way. We'll talk and see what makes most sense.
Game sounds- Message loud and clear. We'll work on this.

Thanks for the great feedback!

Mike

[bostonmyk]

Just a question.  Are there hot key commands that don't have an on-screen button counterpart? 
That is my pet peeve.  The best UI's does not require people to memorize hot keys.
And for each on-screen button, there should be a tool tip.

There's at least one that I can't find, Unassign, which clears current orders for selected unit - something I'm having to do regularly.  I wanted a hotkey list because there are probably more hotkey orders I'd be using, but I've not investigated them.  Besides, you don't have to memorize them all if there's a Hotkey list in-game.

Right now I'm becoming rather frustrated with the poor perfomance of Command on both my computers.  The cause isn't anything clear cut but it's dragging my experience down.  Some of the shortcomings with the interface, many of which JD mentioned, is adding to this feeling like it's a needless chore to track individual unit-specific info without having to sort through OOB, hangar, or scenario database lists.  There are also some occasional 'assistant' AI oddities getting in the way, such as when I couldn't get some of my aircraft to RTB for more than a couple seconds at a time.   I also can't help but recall some of the useful interface options from ye olde Harpoon games, such as being able to create a surface group formation for the purpose of posting an ASW helo patrol on-station (for example), even if there's only one ship in this group.  There are still usability features like this that are missing.  Add to all this the almost non-existant sound and no database pics/art and it feels unfinished in other areas, too.

Hopefully all this stuff gets addressed before long.  With the team's dedication, it likely will at some point.  But I'm having doubts whether adopting this title at release has been instant gratification from the start.  I think it needs more UI work, along with a focus on the usual release issues such as compatibility/performance.

Request for hotkey list in game added.

We've found the best performance is with Win 8 systems. We are looking at a couple fixes that may address it with other systems.

Mike

[JudgeDredd]

Speaking in terms of an visual/auditory experience, I find that trailer somewhat misleading and deceptive, and that is putting it nicely.  There are none of those sounds, pop-up windows, radio comms, etc. in the game.  That is not to say that playing the game cannot be intense and immersive.  But it is not a visual/auditory treat in the least...that being said, nobody ever advertised it as such.  The game simulates exactly what the developers said it would, and it is at the top of the food chain when it comes to modern naval strategic simulation.

Those things crossed my mind too when I watched that video. Not really the best way to advertise what the game truly has to offer, imho.

Having played the game - I totally agree.

Unfortunately we live in a world where marketing is king...and that is pure and simple a marketing video. It's designed to sell the game - not show people how the game plays.

The only way you'd ever really get the truth about how a game plays is to watch an unedited, perhaps even no commentary, video of someone playing the game

[spelk]

So my question to those playing this game, are you finding it immersive and entertaining as the videos and AARs would make you believe?  Does the gameplay help tell a believable story on its own or is your own active mind a must to really maximize the enjoyment?

I think your mileage may vary, depending upon how invested in the era, the theme, and the participants. It's always more entertaining to read a well crafted AAR, that to just poke about in a mission trying to find some spark of interest. Many AAR's (mine included) are shaped in the writing, the actual play is littered with having to frequently press the screenshot key, capturing every little detail, in case you need it for the write up. Obviously video AAR's are different in they often are captured in real time, and then your'e at the mercy of the skill of the player to be a presenter.

A good way to become invested in a game, is to take on the task of an AAR. It forces you to not only document your game religiously, but also you need to think about the decisions you're making, and why you chose one path over another.

For me, if the scenario is intimate enough, and the forces at your disposal realised in terms of historical information, my imagination can carry me a long way when watching small symbols on a map jiggle about and attack each other. Which is why I think the sterile nature of a radar style viewport onto the battle needs some auditory information, and a mood enhancer to help stoke people's imaginations. I know this sort of game is a numbers simulation at its heart, but the players become invested in the game based on their perception that they are commanding fighter planes, and warships, and their anti-sub helo is scouring the waters, and those incoming missiles are real and present danger to your troops.  Dressing it up in a bit of 'presentation' (images of units, sounds of radio chatter, ecm, missiles loading and launching, fighters exploding) would go a long long way in removing the sterility IMHO.

Just playing Introversions Defcon soundtrack in the background dramatically increased my sense of atmosphere when playing last night. It was no longer a silent movie, but it became a moody search alone in dangerous waters for the USS North Carolina. How can a game like this be haunting? Well until I deleted the fecking sub with my ineptitude. ;)

[spelk]

Can I add auto-expansion of heirarchical lists to the featureset? (Airfield Aircraft lists, Mission Editor unit lists etc)

When I click on a menu item/button to see some information, its a bit of a pain to then have to expand a tree with a plus sign click, just to get to said info.

I think it behooves the designers to present information as close to the "front line interface" of the globe as possible, and that when large amounts of operational data is needed out in the field, that 'drilling down' isn't the most desired option.  Similar to JD wanting weapons data on the chrome in real time for the selected unit. Unit state should be visible - as much as is possible - buttons and sub-menus off that is just wasted UI effort for no real gain. 

Obviously make full blown encyclopedia front ends, for lots of drilling down for information seekers outside of the scenario action. But a scroll-able array of sensor/weapon/fuel/damage data thats updated real time for the selected unit would be so very handy. :)

[JudgeDredd]

...such as when I couldn't get some of my aircraft to RTB for more than a couple seconds at a time.

Found this last night re-playing the first tutorial...RTB FFS. I think I eventually got them to RTB by switching off an option...but this ought to be switched off automatically if you take tell a unit to do something...BUT - I would say perhaps that's my lack of understanding of the a mechanic in the AI...standing orders perhaps...but I would still think the AI would do what I say - I am the goddamn commander (albeit a crap one)  :-[

First off - I want to say I ain't disappointed with the game. It's a good game and there's the potential for it to be a great game. It likely is - as people say - head and shoulders above Harpoon...I can't really remember much about playing Harpoon...but...

I'm not getting much of a feeling that this is much different...at least from a UI interface. I'm only saying this out of what I remember of Harpoon - so please bear in mind before you rip me a new one that a) I have a pretty bad memory and b) it was a long time ago -  so perhaps I should keep that thought to myself until I refresh my memory

Maybe that is really unfair and it's mega featured...I've not got there yet.

What I am more surprised about is two fold...
1) as I mentioned earlier in the thread, is that out of all the beta testing they had, no-one picked up on the issues in the UI that myself and Nefaro have mentioned. I'm particularly astonished that when you select a unit on the map, information relating to that unit is displayed on the right hand side but not it's weapon availability - which you have to click another button for
2) And I am going to say this - Matrix banging on about this being a premium title - that's their prerogative to perceive it as such and charge top dollar for it. But I guess a chunk of people have bought it on the back of that statement - and in it's current state, it's just not. Specifically, UI issues, map issues (installed on a VERY fresh OS install and an SSD drive), no weapon database, things like weapons not being dropped because the platform is too high (well...I ordered you to drop your CBU's - so drop low...you're flying over the SAM sites anyway, you're probably safer lower anyway!)
3) I'm not totally sure when an AI is doing something - and it gets me frustrated - that is down to my lack of knowledge more than likely - but I really would like the game to DO AS I SAY and switch off AI - so when I tell a submarine to head in direction X and it's heading in Y - then I want it to stop heading Y and head X - this wasn't my experience last night. Like I said, maybe (likely) down to my lack of understanding - but that could well be put down to another UI thing.

I think someone said it more eloquently than I can - but if you are going to charge this amount of money for a game - it has to hit the floor pretty full. It's not.

That's not to say it's severely lacking - but it's not what I was expecting for £65.

Thankfully - the devs seem to be listening and are being helpful. I've got it now - I'll work with it, get updates and hopefully see it to fruition...

[Dimitris]

Speaking in terms of an visual/auditory experience, I find that trailer somewhat misleading and deceptive, and that is putting it nicely.  There are none of those sounds, pop-up windows, radio comms, etc. in the game.  That is not to say that playing the game cannot be intense and immersive.  But it is not a visual/auditory treat in the least...that being said, nobody ever advertised it as such.  The game simulates exactly what the developers said it would, and it is at the top of the food chain when it comes to modern naval strategic simulation.

Those things crossed my mind too when I watched that video. Not really the best way to advertise what the game truly has to offer, imho.

Having played the game - I totally agree.

Unfortunately we live in a world where marketing is king...and that is pure and simple a marketing video. It's designed to sell the game - not show people how the game plays.

The only way you'd ever really get the truth about how a game plays is to watch an unedited, perhaps even no commentary, video of someone playing the game

To be fair, we've put up numerous gameplay videos both in the past and in the last few days, showing playing the game exactly as is.

[JudgeDredd]

^ yep - seen them.

My comment was purely on the marketing video. And nothing really against it - given it's a marketing video.

And also it's worth mentioning that those have been actively linked to

Also - the points being raised, I know you have taken them and are listening actively. You've said you want a weapon database - that's cool. You've said the devs were in "their zone" in relation to programming and some UI things - that's also great. And the sluggishness - didn't seem to show up in testing and being looked at - all big positives.

But - if I was brutally honest - for £65 I wouldn't be on the boards mentioning these things - I'd be playing.

Having said that - I am playing...just, as Nefaro mentioned - a wee bit with certain things which are tainting it somewhat.

But I'm on board now and in for the long haul...I'm looking forward to a patch or two.

In terms of the sluggish behaviour at times (I haven't played a big mission yet and if you let me know what one is, I'll give it a go) relating to the map and unit movement - can I help by giving you anything? Any info? Log files?

[Dimitris]

During beta testing, I got as far as getting into folks' desktops (TeamViewer etc.) and trying stuff out directly on their rig while talking with them on Skype. I'll have to check with Matrix if we can do that now (legal complications with fiddling into people's machines etc.).