Wish List....

[Lanzfeld]

WynnterGreen,

Do you have a save file of that panther spotting issue for me to pass on to Charles?

[poesel]

My wishes:

- make the whole dis-/embarking from/into vehicles more intuitive

now it works but confuses me everytime - also in Wego you can loose a lot of time

- gamma correction key for night battles

unfortunately most monitors are glossy today so in night battles even with brightness all turned up you only see yourself in the mirror.

Edit: just found this tool for OSX:

http://michelf.com/projects/gamma-control/

Its free and lets you change gamma. A gamma of 0.6 works quite nicely for pitch black night battles.

[Kuderian]

I find it hard to visually judge map height contours.

A hot key that toggled a contour overlay on and off.

[Bradley Dick]

I find it hard to visually judge map height contours.

A hot key that toggled a contour overlay on and off.

This is probably the most useful request I've seen in this entire thread. Didn't the LOS tool previously give elevation and terrain information when you used it? I miss that tool.

[WynnterGreen]

This is probably the most useful request I've seen in this entire thread.

I made a thread about it a while ago..... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=101886

Contour lines have been requested many times, going all the way back to CMx1. I'm not sure what the problem would be to program them, but apparently BFC doesn't feel they are worth the trouble.

Michael

There's a few replies that suggest the 'Gridded Terrain' Mod, which I've tried and is very useful.

I like the 'idea' of contour mapping more, and being able to toggle on and off, but the gridding functions pretty well.

.

[Bradley Dick]

I guess the grid lines would show how the grid square is sloping and that would be a decent substitute for actual elevation information. I think that zooming all the way in and following the movement of the terrain works about as well as the grids probably do.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

I made a thread about it a while ago..... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=101886

There's a few replies that suggest the 'Gridded Terrain' Mod, which I've tried and is very useful.

I like the 'idea' of contour mapping more, and being able to toggle on and off, but the gridding functions pretty well.

.

WG, you may want to refer to post no. 51 from Lanzfeld, some 4 posts above your last one. Are you able to assist with his request?

Regards

KR

[Lanzfeld]

He sent me a PM.

No file but he addressed me.

[Lanzfeld]

I wish that the graphics of doors lined up with the actual doors.

[Kuderian]

I made a thread about it a while ago..... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=101886

There's a few replies that suggest the 'Gridded Terrain' Mod, which I've tried and is very useful.

I like the 'idea' of contour mapping more, and being able to toggle on and off, but the gridding functions pretty well.

.

Thinking about contour overlay further I have come to the conclusion that showing contours from any camera angle or elevation would be quite complicated to code and processor intensive. Having the camera at a fixed height plan view would not work either as different map sizes would need different z axis values to display the full map.

I have a much simpler solution!

A hotkey that toggled the underlying tiles to shades of black and white correlating to the tile's elevation value so for example the peaks would be whitest the depressions blackest. This I imagine would be much easier to code,would require minimal CPU time and would be visually easier to comprehend than contour lines.

[scottie]

Been said a million times and turned down a million times by BF in know but personally i need more of a campaign / strategic mode or at least anything that can help improve continuity between battles in a campaign. I have struggled to get excited about playing CMBN for 6 months or so after playing it to death upon release. Completely understand games like Empire Total War are a completely different from CMBN in many ways but since ETW release in 2009 ish i have logged over 1000 hours. Different markets , different developer budgets i completely understand , just an example of software I just don't get bored of and i believe this is partly due to the size of the campaign. Just my opinion.

[Ranger33]

Been said a million times and turned down a million times by BF in know but personally i need more of a campaign / strategic mode or at least anything that can help improve continuity between battles in a campaign.

Would love to see this as well, but it's a pretty big leap to add it to the game. I think the issue is best addressed with campaigns like Engel, where you have a small-medium sized force that is distinct and grows (or shrinks) over the course of the campaign. It feels a lot more personal than the CMBN campaigns which were well put together, but consisted mostly of "E and F Company attack village" followed by "D Company attacks farm" and then "E and F Company of an entirely different battalion attack some other village". You can never get connected because you are constantly switching between different units.

I would also like to see a few more like Devil's Descent, where you occasionally get to make choices about what to do.

[Bradley Dick]

I have a much simpler solution!

How about a hotkey that displays the elevation value for each tile, like the one that exists in the mission editor?

[scottie]

I would also like to see a few more like Devil's Descent

I agree, best campaign to date IMO , helped provide to a small degree some of that battle continuity i seek. The software as is obviously hits enough buttons with most of us to keep us purchasing and enough sales for BF to make it worth there time so the big leap to a campaign will never happen. All i ask is try bridging gap a little somehow.

[Scrummage]

I'd love to have the option to target my (surpressive) fire in a line like i can target my arty. This would work a lot better than the single targets we can do now. (think about a HMG needing to surpress a piece of bocage, i want the whole bocage under fire... not just a piece of it.

To keep talking about surpressive fire, if i manual target a field gun or AFV and want to lob a shell or to into building i usually spend way more than i would like in WEGO. I would love an option, like with arty, that lets me select the intensity of the direct fire order im giving.

[toxic.zen]

I really miss fire... flamethrowers, flamethrowing tanks, burning terrain, burning buildings, ambushing with a flamethrower, cleaning out a bunker with a blast of fire.... we REALLY need that again.

[ExurbanKevin]

The return of troops riding on tanks. Yes, I get that tanks aren't IFV's, but if, say, a platoon of infantry and a platoon of tanks show up as reinforcements at the back edge of the map, it's be nice to have them be able to hitch a ride up to the front.

[Serk]

Been said a million times and turned down a million times by BF in know but personally i need more of a campaign / strategic mode or at least anything that can help improve continuity between battles in a campaign.

I could'nt agree more. Based on how hard people at the Few Good Men forums are trying to get something close to an historical campaing going and give some meaning to random QB's with a strategic or operational map, there certainly is an interest in this concept. IMO, the Battle of the Bulge would be a perfect operation for a start.

[Brindlewolf]

Could we have some members of HQ units,AT teams,FOs at least trying to spot.The LOS issues i've had because of units brought forward to spot for arty or engage AFVs/vehicles and lose LOS because they're kneeling or lying prone and not being able to see a damn thing.I'm like "Hey guys,i didn't put you in the frontline to sit on your arse!"

[womble]

Could we have some members of HQ units,AT teams,FOs at least trying to spot.The LOS issues i've had because of units brought forward to spot for arty or engage AFVs/vehicles and lose LOS because they're kneeling or lying prone and not being able to see a damn thing.I'm like "Hey guys,i didn't put you in the frontline to sit on your arse!"

I only ever seem to have any problems getting my units like that to spot when they're either suppressed, facing the wrong way (in a building, say, or the Face they have in a Bocage AS means they can't see very far past the hedgerow) or when they're given orders to Hide. Changing either of those things has a pretty much 100% success rate for the sort of problem you describe.

[Brindlewolf]

Ah face command,always forget about that.Apologies and cheers for the tip

[Denis1973]

I wish to gain more control in editor on:

1. Quantity of ammo, especially AP and HE rounds in tanks. This can be useful in simulation of tank without AP rounds, for example.

2. Weapons of infantry squads. There are many rear echelon units that armed mostly with bolt-action rifles with several MP40. I can't simulate this units in current editor 'cos squad always have one MG42/34. Or add to TOE list a "rear echelon unit" consisted of that lightly armed men.

[poesel]

Instead of this:

This:

The fancy ring is not necessary but makes things clearer.

The current opaqueness of the arc is really obnoxious. Please lower the opacity. In the picture above the inside has 10%, the ring 50%.

[Childress]

.

The current opaqueness of the arc is really obnoxious. Please lower the opacity. In the picture above the inside has 10%, the ring 50%.

I'd settle for simply lowering the opacity. Setup zones, as well.

[JonS]

The current opaqueness of the arc is really obnoxious.

True, but it does have the advantage of being clearly visible in all lighting conditions, and on all terrain types. Some set up zone colours are all but invisible on some reasonably common terrain types.