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

[JudgeDredd]

Yes, when a torp is incoming they'll throw everything they can at it, incl. tactical decoys like MOSS. No sense keeping it for later if you have a gaping hole on the sub  :D

lol  ;)

Talking about defensive action, I did notice something last night when I was playing First Contact 2016...when my Russian units detected inbound vampires - they fired a shed load of anti-missile missiles at the incoming...I don't know how many they fired to each inbound but they ran out of those in quick order. Personally, if I was in control of those, I would fire one...if it didn't hit, I'd fire another (possibly two depending on how close)...in the end, I was left 2 ships down - not purely because my ships had ran out of anti-missile missiles, but it certainly contributed...and meanwhile I saw quite a few anti-missile missiles heading off into the distance - wishing they were still on the ship. (I guess this might be linked to yours statement above - but I found myself wishing my ship had kept some back...)

I appreciate the effort gone in to take that away from the user - and certainly on big scenarios it can be construed as a helpful tool - but I don't know...I would like to fire those.

The same thing can be true of automated attacks - my units spit a shed load of weapons off leaving me nothing. I know that you can switch this off though...I forgot  :( Currently I have 5 detected hostiles with 16 SS-N-26 and 8 SS-N-9 missiles heading towards them...overkill especially as I have 4 more unidentified potential hostiles. Of course - it could be the AI is aware of something I am not (that the other 4 are not hostiles for example)...but I would not have launched 5 missiles at each target (though - as I've already stated - I have no naval knowledge and am probably a very bad commander)...it just seemed overkill to me. If the consensus is the engaging AI is doing a great job - then I bow to superior naval understanding.

Also - in the scenario - can I ask why some of the SKUNK contacts stayed as SKUNK contacts but showed as hostile? I presume SKUNK means unidentified - that's fine - but I guess I'm asking how did they suddenly become known hostile instead of unknowns? Was it down to radar emissions or something and just not confirmed the exact platform? I didn't see any reason popping up as to why they were now hostile.

Another minor issue. I notice when you close a window, you don't have control of the main map again. An example is pressing 9 on a group to see the individual units - then clicking the unit to view the database - then close that window and press 9 again - and nothing - you have to click on the map to give control back to the main window...and I'm pretty sure that's not the only place I saw this. In fact - noticed it again when I clicked on a unit and then sensors - closed the sensors and the map needed to be given focus again to interact (I tried to zoom in before I gave the map focus and nothing happened)

Clicking off a unit should get rid of all information on the map relating to the unit - currently clicking off a unit leaves it's range circles up (sensors should stay) and text info relating to the unit

Last night when playing First Contact I noticed a unit showing up as FFL (I think that was the designation) but I couldn't get the database viewer to display info about it...any reason?

When you select a group and then press the 9 key to see the units in the group, the right hand side should default to the unit selected (I believe the group leader?)...at present when you press 9 and go in unit mode, the right hand side stays in group mode...you have to click again to select the same unit when it's actually already highlighted.

[MikeGER]

i am so glad that JD had invested his Pounds  ;)
which will be a benefit for all of us  pointing out 'those hook and eye' for users who are no salty old Harpoon veterans or had real life or simulated Naval career. :)

i am still exploring the sandbox part of the game to familiarize

-a hint for those overlay-lovers:
i found out that a zoom level of 14 (instead of 17 recommend in the manual) using the Gmap utility can be decent enuf to see larger buildings, bridges, railroad crossing and such as a trade off for importing a much larger area.
so if you build a scenario, i recommend try out what GMap zoom level suits you most (the 17 is not written in stone)
also i found out playing over the Arc Gis topo map (last entry in the scroll window) with zoom level 14 can be interesting in the target and the approach zone

a question
does anybody had loaded ground units on a chopper and delivered it to a location, how is this accomplished (how do i get the chopper to land in the landscape, and unload, i think Ferry mission is something different)   

@Dimitris,
i see i can import several overlays, but is it possible to shuffle in-game between several overlays covering the same spot?  That would be real great! 
i think the last imported one is the one shown if the overlays cover the same spot

@Grogs
this morn i woke up -with scales fell from my eyes off- with an idea for a kind of 'little scenarios generator' 
aren't those missions produced playing out DVG's Phantom Leader and Hornet Leader CAO a good blueprint/inspiration for setting up smaller scenarios for those newer to that corner of our niche like me, who don't yet have the deep military history knowledge on Naval/Air affairs through history and what stuff has to show up mandatory in those scenarios especially as OPFOR and which location to place those oppoing assets and target locations....               

[jomni]

@Grogs
this morn i woke up -with scales fell from my eyes off- with an idea for a kind of 'little scenarios generator' 
aren't those missions produced playing out DVG's Phantom Leader and Hornet Leader CVO a good blueprint/inspiration for setting up smaller scenarios for those newer to that corner of our niche like me, who don't yet have the deep military history knowledge on Naval/Air affairs through history and what stuff has to show up mandatory in those scenarios as OPFOR and which location to place the those assets and target locations....             

Sounds interesting.  Pick random mission and defenses based on DVG game system then play it out in Command. :)

[Dimitris]

@Grogs
this morn i woke up -with scales fell from my eyes off- with an idea for a kind of 'little scenarios generator' 
aren't those missions produced playing out DVG's Phantom Leader and Hornet Leader CVO a good blueprint/inspiration for setting up smaller scenarios for those newer to that corner of our niche like me, who don't yet have the deep military history knowledge on Naval/Air affairs through history and what stuff has to show up mandatory in those scenarios as OPFOR and which location to place the those assets and target locations....             

Sounds interesting.  Pick random mission and defenses based on DVG game system then play it out in Command. :)

I second that. I'd gladly play any such scenario.

(Yeah I also play the game  ;D )

[Dimitris]

Talking about defensive action, I did notice something last night when I was playing First Contact 2016...when my Russian units detected inbound vampires - they fired a shed load of anti-missile missiles at the incoming...I don't know how many they fired to each inbound but they ran out of those in quick order. Personally, if I was in control of those, I would fire one...if it didn't hit, I'd fire another (possibly two depending on how close)...in the end, I was left 2 ships down - not purely because my ships had ran out of anti-missile missiles, but it certainly contributed...and meanwhile I saw quite a few anti-missile missiles heading off into the distance - wishing they were still on the ship. (I guess this might be linked to yours statement above - but I found myself wishing my ship had kept some back...)

I appreciate the effort gone in to take that away from the user - and certainly on big scenarios it can be construed as a helpful tool - but I don't know...I would like to fire those.

The same thing can be true of automated attacks - my units spit a shed load of weapons off leaving me nothing. I know that you can switch this off though...I forgot  :( Currently I have 5 detected hostiles with 16 SS-N-26 and 8 SS-N-9 missiles heading towards them...overkill especially as I have 4 more unidentified potential hostiles. Of course - it could be the AI is aware of something I am not (that the other 4 are not hostiles for example)...but I would not have launched 5 missiles at each target (though - as I've already stated - I have no naval knowledge and am probably a very bad commander)...it just seemed overkill to me. If the consensus is the engaging AI is doing a great job - then I bow to superior naval understanding.

At the beta folks' request, we added an option literally as the Gold was being packed, to tell the unit to "Hold Fire" (which is why you won't find it in the manual). Unit context menu -> Attack -> "Hold Fire (No AI attacks)". When that option is selected, the unit will not use any weapons whatsoever, except automatic point-defences (Phalanx etc.) & decoys/countermeasures (Nixie, Rubber-Duck etc.) when an enemy missile/torpedo is about to impact. This allows you to finetune with precision the amount & types of ordnance you want to be used and allocate them manually. It also means the unit's survival is entirely on your shoulders  ;)

Also - in the scenario - can I ask why some of the SKUNK contacts stayed as SKUNK contacts but showed as hostile? I presume SKUNK means unidentified - that's fine - but I guess I'm asking how did they suddenly become known hostile instead of unknowns? Was it down to radar emissions or something and just not confirmed the exact platform? I didn't see any reason popping up as to why they were now hostile.

Without seeing your tactical situation, my guess is that you were tracking them when they launched weapons at one of your units and thus auto-classified them as hostile.

Another minor issue. I notice when you close a window, you don't have control of the main map again. An example is pressing 9 on a group to see the individual units - then clicking the unit to view the database - then close that window and press 9 again - and nothing - you have to click on the map to give control back to the main window...and I'm pretty sure that's not the only place I saw this. In fact - noticed it again when I clicked on a unit and then sensors - closed the sensors and the map needed to be given focus again to interact (I tried to zoom in before I gave the map focus and nothing happened)

We tried this for a while, towards the end of the beta, and we had a flood of bugs. So we preferred to leave it as-is and tackle it again when we wouldn't have a deadline to meet. It's an extra click on the map.

Clicking off a unit should get rid of all information on the map relating to the unit - currently clicking off a unit leaves it's range circles up (sensors should stay) and text info relating to the unit

Ummm you will not find me in perfect agreement on this. Lots of times you want to view such information for a number of your units concurrently, without having to select them.

Last night when playing First Contact I noticed a unit showing up as FFL (I think that was the designation) but I couldn't get the database viewer to display info about it...any reason?

This sounds like a possible bug. Could you please post the autosave?

When you select a group and then press the 9 key to see the units in the group, the right hand side should default to the unit selected (I believe the group leader?)...at present when you press 9 and go in unit mode, the right hand side stays in group mode...you have to click again to select the same unit when it's actually already highlighted.

Interesting idea, that one. Thanks!

[markh]

Hi Dimitris

Firstly, congratulations on this release.  I am a happy new customer, and I am happy to recommend this to fellow gamers who enjoy this genre.

I am very keen to get into creating my own scenarios with the scenario editor.  A reasonable part of the scenario editor process appears to be fairly intuitive - but there are parts that are not - and I do not have enough leisure/free time to stumble through the process.  I would rather spend my time constructing and playing simple scenarios.  I have had a look at the Youtube tutorials that you have posted (and they have also been helpful).  Having said that, is there a simple scenario-editor specific manual/wiki that is available?  Thanks in advance.

[JudgeDredd]

Thanks Dimitris

Found the Hold Fire - just discovered it too late.

SKUNK - there were alot of missiles coming in...probably that - I'd ignore this one.

Map Focus - ok...thanks for looking - it is just a click - but with a lot of my other mentions relating to interface, the clicks do mount up  ;)

Removing data when clicking off - fine...I guess that could be a requirement in future games. No problem for me leaving that one.

For the FFL - I'm afraid I can't - I was busy playing today  ;)

Cheers - now to play  :D

[mikeck]

having watched and waited for a while, pffft while - a year, i know theres plenty of posts about UI and price but can anyone whos playing it actually say if theyre enjoying it or not?

In short, I'm loving it.

Of course, if you have incoming torpedoes close by, you'd better be cranking up the speed & damn the cavitation!  ;D

I think you still want to go deep if you have a torpedo chasing you . I haven't tested it yet, but I'm pretty sure cavitation will effect the torpedo's chance of detecting you.

I think it's about the thermal layer also right? If the torpedoe and you are above the layer, you want to get below it correct?

[Kushan]

having watched and waited for a while, pffft while - a year, i know theres plenty of posts about UI and price but can anyone whos playing it actually say if theyre enjoying it or not?

In short, I'm loving it.

Of course, if you have incoming torpedoes close by, you'd better be cranking up the speed & damn the cavitation!  ;D

I think you still want to go deep if you have a torpedo chasing you . I haven't tested it yet, but I'm pretty sure cavitation will effect the torpedo's chance of detecting you.

I think it's about the thermal layer also right? If the torpedoe and you are above the layer, you want to get below it correct?

Until the torpedo follows you under the layer. It also depends on the tactical situation. I've been playing a lot of the Trapper Under Ice scenario, and I've had plenty of engagements where both side where at max depth. No point in running above the layer and creating cavitation at that point, the only thing to do is to put the torpedo on your tail and run like hell.

[Nefaro]

having watched and waited for a while, pffft while - a year, i know theres plenty of posts about UI and price but can anyone whos playing it actually say if theyre enjoying it or not?

In short, I'm loving it.

Of course, if you have incoming torpedoes close by, you'd better be cranking up the speed & damn the cavitation!  ;D

I think you still want to go deep if you have a torpedo chasing you . I haven't tested it yet, but I'm pretty sure cavitation will effect the torpedo's chance of detecting you.

No, it shouldn't unless the torpedo is forced to stay in a Passive acquisition mode.  I don't even think passive acq mode is modelled for torpedoes - just Active.  Except for the Wake-Homers but those can only target surface ships anyway.  Which is fine because Active homing mode for torpedoes is far more reliable.

Diving deep while running at high speed is always a good idea IMO.  If you're being attacked, the closer to the surface you are, the more likely they are to detect you and can theoretically attack you more quickly.  Not sure if torpedo depth is modelled, however.

[Dimitris]

Passive homing is included. Not many torps out there use it in terminal mode though.

[Nefaro]

Passive homing is included. Not many torps out there use it in terminal mode though.

Just the Wake-Homers, right?  I don't recall any being Passive-only off the top of my head, other than that special case, but there probably was at some point.

[Grim.Reaper]

As expected, I knew I would eventually buy it, so I decided why wait and purchased earlier today.  Not sure how I feel about it overall yet, way too early.  It has a little bit of an "old" feel to it, but could grow on me.  This does not mean the actual gameplay won't be good (which the gameplay is the most important thing), just my initial feel when navigating around.  However, I believe this will be a well maintained game with a lot of user content in the future and good developer support so at this point I more consider it an investment in the future versus something in the near term.  I am definitely going to stick with it and see how it evolves.

After spending some initial time with the game, here are some of my comments.  I apologize if this have been previously mentioned, but the lists are so long and hard to track them all:)  If I repeat something, maybe that just adds strength to see improvement:)

1)  I am not a big fan of how you move around the map within the game.  It requires you to right-click in areas to move you to that section of the map or use keyboard keys.  In a lot of games, scrolling to the edges or click-n-drag is very popular methods for moving around and much easier in my opinion.  I realize the right-click might be from Harpoon days, but don't like it much.  Minimally I would like to see my methods as options available.

2)  I don't like when popups come up and they are separate game windows.  If I alt-tab, I have to go through multiple game windows some times.  Most games will have their windows self-contained versus separate.

3)  For a complex game like this I would have liked to seen the tutorials done different.  I realize there are videos released, but not a big fan of the in-game tutorials.  What I most dislike is that it is not broken up into small enough steps.  A screen comes up and you have to read a lot of text and conduct multiple orders.  I would like to see it be much more step-by-step to ease a new person into the game.  At the end of the day, I really gave up on them and just moved on for right now.

4)  When you move over objects such as your formations, groups, units, etc., it would be nice if there was some kind of tooltip that came up giving you basic information about what you are hovering over versus having to always select the unit first.  Would be a great time saver as your reviewing your assets.

5)  Maintaining previous window sizes is a must.  Too tedious to keep resetting.

6)  When reviewing your message log, should be able to click on an event and the game take you to the action.  That is very common on games and with so much going on, would make it easier.

7)  I know I probably will be laughed at, but I am not a geography expert.  When I receive instructions I need to go to country x or location x, I don't always have a clue as to where it is in the world.  Would really love some kind of toggle/option that would show country names and key location names (if appropriate).

8.)  I am just getting into the gameplay, but reading through all the forums has me concerned about micromanagement versus AI management.  I prefer to play the game at a commander level versus micromanaging, but what I have heard is that at certain times, you still got to take control of units because they don't do certain things well.  I am hoping this is something that improves since I am just not good at managing all the details at once.

9)  Unless I am missing something, in the scenario editor, you can only show one side's units at a time on the map.  If I want to see blue, I toggle blue.  If I want to see Red, I toggle Red.  I did not see an option where I could see all units on the map at the same time.  As a designer, I would think this is important so you can see all the units in relation to each other, but right now it is a toggle-fest.

10)  Need much more tool tips.  If there is an option to select or change, would be great for tool tips to explain what changing the option does without having to hunt for the information in a user manual.

11)  A pet peeve of mine.  If an option is not available for a unit or during a certain situation, it should either be removed or grayed out to look disabled.  For example, if you right click on a ship that doesn't have any air capabilities, the Air Operations menu option should not be there or at least looked disabled.

12)  Unless I am missing something, I can't see a way to cancel air operations.  For example, if I start to get aircraft ready for launch, I don't see an option to cancel their launch.  Hopefully just missing it.

I am sure I will be back with more feedback as I get more into the details...

[undercovergeek]

Any comments from the guys on here who beta tested this?

[Toonces]

I just blame everything on Jarhead.  Since he isn't around, it seems safe enough.