|
I mean I'm not saying I'm glad a lady strangled a baby, but I am glad it made Hawkeye feel bad. Serious CMANO talk, what about a visual weather layer and maybe like the ability to download live weather data like some flight sims do? Oh also here is my favorite CMANO tutorial. 
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
gizmojumpjet posted:I mean I'm not saying I'm glad a lady strangled a baby, but I am glad it made Hawkeye feel bad. Drone posted:A M*A*S*H-style tabletop RPG recently got kickstarted. I forgot what it's called though but it looked cool as poo poo. hmmmm that does sounds coo lol kickstarter, didnt some goon game barkey shut up and jam was super-funded back in like 2012 and still nothing lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
new F-35B footage http://i.imgur.com/rDSeFwN.gifv
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:new F-35B footage the gfx for CMANO II look great
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Hey Baloogan, I've got a feature request for CMANO;quote:A concept called “Dust,” “Environmental,” https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1981/8116/811605.PDF One implementation I saw involved B53's submerged in gigantic pits full of borated water.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
you could implement that in lua, complete with a physics sim etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
I go some Command UI requests. The unit sensors screen should have clickable links to the databae for each sensor, like how it does for the weapon and aircraft screens. Also it'd be nice if it showed the range of the sensor in the sensor screen as well. another cool thing would be a list of acronyms, maybe a pop up screen in the help menu like how the hotkeys is done. e; remembered another thing. In the briefing screens you can select and copy text but you can't copy text in the database screen. I like looking up some obsecure poo poo online now and then and just being able to select, ctrl c and then ctrl-ving into google would be pretty nice. Another possible idea: wiki links to poo poo inside the database viewer, CK2 does that with a load of historical characters although I rarely use it there, but I probably would a fair bit here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
I've been watching some videos for that new Ultimate General game and its looking pretty solid now even for an EA. Since its been out for a little bit now, any more thoughts by the goons who've played it? I saw some of the posts earlier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
And is there a general Idiot's Guide to Modern Naval Warfare out there? I know plane poo poo but ship poo poo is a bit alien to me. As fun as stumbling around trying poo poo is it'd be nice to have a general idea as to what the gently caress it is I'm supposed to be doing,.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
I fuckin sunk a LA Class with an akula last night (Without any ASW assistance!) and nearly knocked over my desk and destroyed my computer in the ensuing celebration
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
baloogan I know you said no to ufos but could you add a variety of giant monsters to command I mean since the pentagon is using it now you should ensue they can plan for all the contingencies
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
CMANO trip report after 43 hours in: It's pretty solid grog fun, for all the reasons mentioned in the thread before. It could really do with multiplayer though, right now a lot depends on the scenario author spoon-feeding the AI. For example, I just finished South China Clash as the US: The entire Chinese SAG got wiped out with a single SLAM-ER volley. The attack was very obvious, a bunch of aircraft coming at the SAG with search radars on, then suddenly turning around. But since the SLAM-ER uses passive guidance, the AI never saw this as an attack and did not turn on it's radars until the missiles hit it in the face. Similarly, the AI never hunts subs unless either directly attacked by them, or told explicitly to do so by the scenario designer. If a ship is sunk by a sub, other units nearby will not try to find it, nor will they take precautions against sub attack. Thus a sub can pick off ships one at a time without interference, even if there are other ships with available ASW helicopters within range. I've been looking at missions in the editor after playing them, and a lot of them are just a collection of enemy units pointed in the general direction of the player. Without scenario author input, these units just execute their planned missions, only deviating in self-defense to obvious threats (locked up by fire-control radar / incoming missile clearly identified). That probably explains the behavior mentioned above. But an AI with more foresight would not only be difficult to implement, it would probably also break every scenario currently available. As I see it, CMANO is a great sandbox. But as an actual game it depends very heavily on hand-scripted content. Are the official DLC missions more complex? Was thinking about getting Northern Inferno.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
'A lot of scenarios become really simple once you give yourself ICBM silos and nuclear doctrine, the ability to fire nukes whenever you want' -Baloogan I am glad your tutorials are factual!
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
just imagine what a president trump would do as cinc 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
I'm playing through the 1973 English vs Ugandans tutorial mission, and my Lightnings like to get into head-to-head gun duels with enemy MiG-21s instead of using their missiles. They're much better pilots than the Ugandans so it usually works out alright, but what's the mechanical reason for this? Two things come to mind: 1. In certain combinations of launcher and target speed/altitude/heading, the probability of getting a missile hit is too low to waste a launch and the next best option is going in with guns. 2. The Lightning's Red Top missile is an IR seeker and doesn't work in cloud cover. My F-4s have radar-guided missiles and aren't nearly as hesitant to launch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Also I'm trying to imagine all the things a truly effective AI would have to take into account to be competitive with a good human and it's kinda crazy! Yikes!
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:just imagine what a president trump would do as cinc Every turn, there's a 10% chance that he loses his poo poo over some rando on Twitter and the nukes fly
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
ZekeNY posted:Every turn, there's a 10% chance that he loses his poo poo over some rando on Twitter and the nukes fly Make Nagasaki Glow Again
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
Jimmy4400nav posted:I've been watching some videos for that new Ultimate General game and its looking pretty solid now even for an EA. Since its been out for a little bit now, any more thoughts by the goons who've played it? I saw some of the posts earlier. Its really promising. Plays pretty much exactly the same as Gettysburg on the tactical layer, although since it was made easier I've been finding it a bit too easy on medium, but don't want to jack it up to hard as I think all it does is increase the enemies resources. The AI could stand to be more aggressive, at the moment skirmishers in woods can hold off entire brigades for a really long time, but if the Brigade just charged it could brush them aside. It also tends to charge one brigade at a time (and lose) in situations where a mass charge would easily break through. On the strategic layer I'd like to see exactly what officers do be highlighted (if they do anything except not having a high enough rank cause a lack of efficency), particularly Divisional officers. In the confederate campaign I'm playing now I'm just about to reach Shiloh, so maybe the game will make me eat my words about being too easy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
There's some tooltip and AI work to be done and I'd love a way to more efficiently highlight which brigades are yours and which are part of the map. At the moment I just rename all my brigades to Brigadier Bones Wild Ride etc etc so they stand out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Tried to play the 60s NORAD mission in CMNAO and I keep losing Delta Darts from them EMPing themselves with their own Genie nuclear rockets 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Tried to play the 60s NORAD mission in CMNAO and I keep losing Delta Darts from them EMPing themselves with their own Genie nuclear rockets lol, sorry about that haha; should report that on the matrix CWDB thread. Case of implementing a neat new thing without fully checking the db for issues hahaha Glorgnole posted:Also I'm trying to imagine all the things a truly effective AI would have to take into account to be competitive with a good human and it's kinda crazy! Yikes! Yeah; its actually a really hard problem which is why we went with heavy scripting to make individual scenarios reactive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
I'm making a near future scenario that, for whatever reason, Russia deployed a strike force and captured the Faroe Islands. Aside from immediately unleashing World War III, what is the best way I can simulate a NATO effort to free the island? Defenses shouldn't be too heavy since they're fresh units, but logistics will be the issue, especially if I decide that Russia has her fleet near by. Long range bombers from the United States/Iceland/UK + a US/UK/Denmark naval taskforce?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
dogsarentdangerous posted:Its really promising. Plays pretty much exactly the same as Gettysburg on the tactical layer, although since it was made easier I've been finding it a bit too easy on medium, but don't want to jack it up to hard as I think all it does is increase the enemies resources. The AI could stand to be more aggressive, at the moment skirmishers in woods can hold off entire brigades for a really long time, but if the Brigade just charged it could brush them aside. It also tends to charge one brigade at a time (and lose) in situations where a mass charge would easily break through. Dunno if the recent patch to reduce enemy numbers has fixed it, but i find that if the regiments have a good size advantage on my they charge like motherfuckers, which is a pain because even if i fight them off my units are guarenteed to be exhausted afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Its an outtake... of an advanced tutorial. This is why I don't post outtakes usually! (I have 100s...) The comedic timing of the f16 just as you realise your helo doesn't have dipping sonar *kisses fingers* beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Glorgnole posted:I'm playing through the 1973 English vs Ugandans tutorial mission, and my Lightnings like to get into head-to-head gun duels with enemy MiG-21s instead of using their missiles. They're much better pilots than the Ugandans so it usually works out alright, but what's the mechanical reason for this? Two things come to mind: iirc people were talking about this before; something like that the red top is pretty garbage and only really works from a fairly specific angles? sorry, can't find it with a quick search. wiki notes: quote:This meant that some of the planned improvements to Red Top were never carried out, including all-aspect capability (as seen on the later AIM-9L/M Sidewinder).[4] Red Top was only "capable of all aspect homing against super-sonic targets."
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Hey, is there a way to use decoy torpedoes other than firing them ahead of my expected sub track and changing course/depth/speed? edit: god i'm so horny about sub on sub violence. if there was a silent hunter style game where you were in command of an attack sub hunting boomers i'd never loving stop playing it
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Cling-Wrap Condom posted:Hey, is there a way to use decoy torpedoes other than firing them ahead of my expected sub track and changing course/depth/speed? cold waters
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Glorgnole posted:I'm playing through the 1973 English vs Ugandans tutorial mission, and my Lightnings like to get into head-to-head gun duels with enemy MiG-21s instead of using their missiles. They're much better pilots than the Ugandans so it usually works out alright, but what's the mechanical reason for this? Two things come to mind: Red Top is a rear-aspect only missile. If they're going on the standard course (directly to Entebbe Airport) they'll go head-on with the MiG-21s and thus won't be able to use them. And since they're less agile than the MiG-21s they won't be able to get behind them. Basically UK procurement sucks eggs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
Cling-Wrap Condom posted:Hey, is there a way to use decoy torpedoes other than firing them ahead of my expected sub track and changing course/depth/speed? theres a bunch of really great sub sims dangerous waters is pretty much the gold standard for cold war subs, get the russian megasuper buff mod as it rachets up the groggyness the story goes: sonalyists got in trouble for making dangerous waters from their professional real world sonar military contracts for being too realistic and now they don't make civilian sim games any more
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:theres a bunch of really great sub sims I've played dee dubbya, it's very good! But I secretly lust for something with a visible bridge crew, where I can watch my sweat sailor boys sit silently at their controls as my orders are whispered around the room. god.... mmmmm
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
for whatever god forsaken reason DW has a built in voice recognition system so you can yell commands at your bridge crew and make every who ever loved you hate you a little more every time you say something like "make your course two niner zero, make turns for zero five knots"
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Ha I remember that, the voice recognition is both awesome and awful and makes the rest of the family wish you were really at sea for six months.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:for whatever god forsaken reason DW has a built in voice recognition system so you can yell commands at your bridge crew and make every who ever loved you hate you a little more every time you say something like "make your course two niner zero, make turns for zero five knots" gently caress ok im goijng to have to buy it again, I didn't know this was a thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:for whatever god forsaken reason DW has a built in voice recognition system so you can yell commands at your bridge crew and make every who ever loved you hate you a little more every time you say something like "make your course two niner zero, make turns for zero five knots" What the hell, that's the greatest thing ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
So I am gleaning that having active sensors on ships in Command is a bad idea as it makes you easy to detect but what situation warrants using such sensors and if you can't use them on ships, what are you supposed to do? Use passive sensors or aircraft with sensors themselves (positioned behind said ships and potential air assets)?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:So I am gleaning that having active sensors on ships in Command is a bad idea as it makes you easy to detect but what situation warrants using such sensors and if you can't use them on ships, what are you supposed to do? Use passive sensors or aircraft with sensors themselves (positioned behind said ships and potential air assets)? Depends on the era, really. Its a really complicated question. Going with historical fights, Falklands, Tanker War, Yemen 2016 radars were on 24/7 pretty much when expecting hostiles. Falklands dustup in fact had a neat issue (that isn't simulated in Command) where special long range radios on one of the ships couldn't operate while the search radars were on. And they were talking with UK via a relay and a argie jet got the drop on em because they were talking too much with home base. Use aircraft as much as you can to detect. If your ships need to use their surface search to locate targets something has gone wrong, or you are playing a budget country's navy lol. Think about the reasons why nation's build ships; many countries could get away with just an air force to defend their coast; but they still invest in ships. Ships have a few neat properties that make them extremely useful: http://www.navy.mil.za/sangp100/sangp100_ch03.pdf 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:What's the straight dope with regards to Order of Battle? What campaigns are good? I think the forums ate my post, so here's the short version: Order of Battle is an okay game. Its like Panzer Corps but with a more involved Supply system/mechanic. The Campaigns vary from passable to good, depending on your play style and difficulty. Personally, I think the game is too hard at even the regular difficulty. Income and deployment limitations are always a problem, and it doesn't feel as well balanced as Panzer Corps. The length of the campaigns leaves a little to be desired. I don't have OoB in front of me at the moment, but I believe the campaigns hover around 13 or so missions each. These feel very short in comparison to the Grand Campaign from PC. All the Panzer Corps Campaigns have as many or more missions. That being said, the objectives, on average, for each mission are WAY more varied than Panzer Corps' stuff. The way they work specializations and long-term objective rewards is neat, and a welcome addition to the genre.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 12:19
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:What's the straight dope with regards to Order of Battle? What campaigns are good? I really like the original 2 pacific theater campaigns, so IJN and USN/Marine, they are both very meaty and great fun, the japanese land war in china is pretty tricky and it also feels less fun to play because everything is less mobile because its less technologically advanced, theres a lot of mowing down shitloads of chinese infantry in that game with your own slightly less lovely infantry. Finland is interesting and quite good because it forces you to fight intelligently whereas when i was playing the other campaigns it was very much a methodical process of Artillery barrage, attack and encircle, move up artillery and repeat, stopping the russian tank advance with AT guns is certainly an interesting variation on the previous campaigns and defensive fights are often a lot more interesting (ski troops are really frigging useful). The new Blitzkreig campaign is also really fun because of the scale of the battles and just the ability to do mobile warfare for the first time, the other campaigns dont really let you do tank manuever because its all fighting in cities or pacific isnland jungles or you dont have the tech and resources to actually do mobile warfare due to being 1937 Japan/Finland. I think they are all worth it, the worst is the land war in china one i think just as a consequence of the large expanses of terrain and lack of technologically advanced equipment., and often the sheer quantity of poo poo you have to fight is somewhat tedious. Jobbo is right in the sense of its a tough game but i dont think its unfairly so, on regular difficulty i only had to restart a couple of missions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
Played the first intro CMNAO scenario, where you have three ships and a sub hunting a Soviet force. My sub engaged what might have been the force way off where it was supposed to be, sank two with torps after wasting its entire tomahawk reserves on a ship it missed every time. Then my main force ran into a sub while all their choppers were refueling and died. Subs OP, please nerf. e: also the Hitman Blood Money soundtrack goes really well with it somehow StashAugustine fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 16:43
|
|
