Engine 5 Wishlist

[BornGinger]

On 1/8/2022 at 11:10 AM, chuckdyke said:

Quite a nice picture that one.

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, BornGinger said:

Quite a nice picture that one.

Thank you I like my post processing and I don't hide the fact that I see a basic screenshot like a picture negative. 

[chuckdyke]

On 1/10/2022 at 10:40 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

In my experience, opposing units within two tiles (16m) massively favour grenades over their rifles, even against units only briefly passing through that zone.

Thank you, you gave me that tip and it is actually my experience too. 

[BornGinger]

On 12/21/2021 at 9:24 PM, Erwin said:

Mission 3 of CMFB's otherwise xnt campaign "RollbahnD" requires one to travel a convoy from one side of the map along twisting roads to the other.

Just make an end point where those tanks are supposed to go and they'll go over logs and stones until they reach the end point. I only lost one vehicle when I did it that way.

You can always restart the scenario if you loose more than one vehicle due to it being bogged down.

[RMM]

6 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

Just make an end point where those tanks are supposed to go and they'll go over logs and stones until they reach the end point. I only lost one vehicle when I did it that way.

You can always restart the scenario if you loose more than one vehicle due to it being bogged down.

So they'll automatically pick the least risk (from bogging), most efficient route?

[A Canadian Cat]

2 hours ago, RMM said:

So they'll automatically pick the least risk (from bogging), most efficient route?

Nope, I would spend a bit of time navigating the roads or at least controlling where they cross water, forest and other high risk areas.

[RMM]

4 minutes ago, IanL said:

Nope, I would spend a bit of time navigating the roads or at least controlling where they cross water, forest and other high risk areas.

Ah, so that goes back to the original request for a convoy order, because even with such micro-managing of movement orders, vehicles can still get bogged when they try to divert around slower vehicles that one hasn't properly accounted for.

[BornGinger]

14 hours ago, RMM said:

So they'll automatically pick the least risk (from bogging), most efficient route?

Doing it the way I proposed is a risk you take and hope it will go well. I just wasn't very interested in giving that scenario much planning and didn't care what might happen. It just happened to turn out well.

[chuckdyke]

What I like to see is that we can split a unit in a truck, APC or IFV. There is a way around this but I like to see it more straight forward. 

[Davis06]

Thanks for asking for the feedback.  FYI- I play CMSF2 and CMBS.

1. Environment/Map
   1. Better map editing tools:  aka more paintbrush options for all roads, elevations, fences, etc.  I understand the 1x1 meter detail needed IOT accurately represent the physical environment.  It's just extremely un-user friendly and way too time consuming.  I imagine, this prevents more content to be developed and shared, which lowers how many players you can add. 
      1. I've seen recommendation for procedural generated maps.  That may be a cool option.
      2. Or: add the possibility to directly import a whole map from an outside source; bing/google/esri/etc.  An AI/machine learning/GAN (generative adversarial network) software program would be needed IOT determine all the needed details, but it would take the scale of the locations to be way more infinitely expansive. 
   2. The ability to create and save our own battle orders/task organizations:  personally, I've been working to figure out better RUS task orgs vs USA as their base 2017 ones don't cut the mustard.   I'd be a quality of life improvement.
   3. More mod tools:  While it may be a concern to open up the ability for others to add units or terrain objects, it could greatly improve the interest and player base.  Reference- Cities Skylines.  (while that base game was a great improvement over simcity, the modding steam workshop has been what has kept the game going and growing.  I'm sure paradox has been happy with all the dozen of DLCs revenues they've gained b/c of that openness model)
   4. Contour line hot keys; While the game's been a great teacher on the importance of micro and macro terrain utilization, conducting terrain analysis takes way too long.  Adding the ability see general contour lines would assist in ID'ing IV (inter-visibility lines) quicker and wouldn't take away from the ruthless punishment we all love about this game.
   5. More defensive tools and options!; more in game options for defensive positions would add to the realism.  Simple fighting positions (holes w/ no cover) should cost way less or nothing as everyone has an E-tool and pioneer equipment for digging simple positions.  Having improved positions (T and different shaped/ overhead cover/ vic fighting positions) with prior costs makes sense in that BN/BDE/DIV engineers would need to build those or provide resources.  We should always have the option to build what we can organically.
      1. This also needs to be an option w/in the mission/scenario/battle; not just w/in the deployment phase
      2. MOPMS/FASCAM/VOLCANO/MICLICs/etc and other country equivalents HAVE to be added if you want to continue to call this a realistic game. 
      3. Specifically to CMBS- If only we could conduct a wet gap crossing with bridging assets.... I can imaging playing a mission recalling some of action during the Great Raid of 2014 of the 95th UKR brigade.
   6. Represent literally every civilian just as any normal pixletroopen.  Having this option and tool set in the scenario editor would also open up an entire other facet to play.  Imagine humanitarian crisis scenarios or having goals to also evac civilian wounded.
2. TAC-AI/Gameplay
   1. Non-line of sight Call For Fire: It can be called anywhere at anytime: it would need to have less accuracy with the bracketing adjustments.
   2. Macro Tools; The micromanagement has been great to understand every detail of small unit tactics and every aspect of the fight.  However, when getting to company/BN/etc. level operations, that micromanagement isn't the best method.  Maybe for those higher leaders add more commands that can be given (ideally in a joint tactical task defined task/purpose) ie- attack/defend/isolate, consolidate & reorg, ambush, etc. 
      1. Leader soft factors could then play more of a role as the added leader tac-ai would be poor/better/best at figuring out the best way to execute the order.
      2. Reference the upcoming VBS4 plan tools.  This would add another layer of valuable game play options.  Steel Division 2's 'smart orders' are kind of a step in the direction as well.
   3. Better team commands; such as vehicle section or PLT berm drills
   4. For higher difficulties; possibly add more medivac requirements.  All the staff (1SG, XOs, staffs) are already represented; having to evac certain casualties to an exit marker in order to reach an aid station would add more realistic depth as well.
   5. MORE AMMO (class V)!!!!!! For god sakes, the lack of SMAW, Gustov, Javelin, TOW, etc resupply options are crazy!  A supply section would have way more class V than what is offered. 

Anyway, again thanks for asking for the feedback!

 

 

[FlammenwerferX]

46 minutes ago, Davis06 said:

Thanks for asking for the feedback.  FYI- I play CMSF2 and CMBS.

1. Environment/Map
   1. Better map editing tools:  aka more paintbrush options for all roads, elevations, fences, etc.  I understand the 1x1 meter detail needed IOT accurately represent the physical environment.  It's just extremely un-user friendly and way too time consuming.  I imagine, this prevents more content to be developed and shared, which lowers how many players you can add. 

This 

[AlexUK]

Exiting bunkers invulnerability too. Very frustrating. 

 

Out on a limb scenario, CMBN, for example. No bazookas so have to close assault. 

[chuckdyke]

I like a dedicated Signal Unit in the game. Who can extend the range of horizontal communication between HQ units. To have an Infantry Battalion HQ who is required to be inside four action squares or closer to be able to communicate with the armoured battalion is a tat ridiculous especially in the modern games. In modern warfare with the unconventionals they can establish by some whizzkid communication between units or the Syrian units who lack communications all together.

[BornGinger]

Every time I see destroyed and burning vehicles it seems a bit silly that the smoke from them always go straight up while other kinds of smoke and dust go sideways.

Is this something BFC has designed to make it easier to spot the enemy's destroyed vehicles so the player can think "Yes! I killed that bloody tank. I'm so good I deserve a lollypop" or is there another reason to this? Strong wind doesn't make much of a difference and the smoke still goes mostly straight up to do a slight bend higher up.

The picture is from DoubleD's youtube video of an H2H battle in Black Sea.

[Commanderski]

When in the Scenario Author Test mode it would be nice to be able to click a button and see the individual hexes.

Plus having smoke that doesn't always rise up as mentioned above would be great.

[BornGinger]

13 hours ago, Commanderski said:

it would be nice to be able to click a button and see the individual hexes.

There is a mod you can use to get this effect. I don't remember what it's called but you find in on the mod section of thefewgoodmen website.

[sgt.longbow]

1. unit purchase phase have vehicles and units displayed in 2d or 3d models for easier identification.

2.better description of vehicle or plane loadout in unit purchase screen  ,instead of just su25 heavy close air support it would read su25 2 /500kg bomb 60 he rocket   etc.

3.weather effect like blowing wind and rain.

4.change units formations in battle, to wedge or line etc.

5.helicopters units that can land and unload troops or carry anti tank guns.

6.derivable suicide vehicles.

7.air dropped supplies from a plane.

8.use 100% of modern cpu and gpu.

[IronCat60]

It may have been mentioned and I may have missed it.

A more deliberate way to ensure squad automatic and AT weapons are picked up and remanned instead of hoping that "Casualty Aid" gets to them.

Something along the lines of a "Retrive Equipment" command where a much shorter pause is enacted where only key weapons and ammo is collected from the casualties. Buddy Aid is not performed.

This command would help when moving from a location in a hasty manner but you need to ensure key weapons, ammo and equipment are picked up.

Such a command would also allow units moving quickly through a casualty area of another unit the possibility of retrieving equipment they may need.

A command where mortar teams may abandon their mortar when it is out of ammo or they are being overrun.

Ammo Bearers the ability to drop their load at a MG or AT gun location so they may be able to perform as a security element without the loss of their ammo.  Also the ability to share their load with another unit when theirs is destroyed.  Ability to abandon their load when it becomes no longer relevant.

 

 

 

 

[chuckdyke]

26 minutes ago, IronCat60 said:

A command where mortar teams may abandon their mortar when it is out of ammo

This one makes sense.

[scottie]

Campaigns and campaign map.

(I know its never going to happen due to the complexity though , we have been over this a few times over the years)

[RMM]

56 minutes ago, scottie said:

Campaigns and campaign map.

(I know its never going to happen due to the complexity though , we have been over this a few times over the years)

I don't get that though, since casualty and damage stats are already transferred, couldn't the battle map from the previous campaign's battle not, simply be imported into the next battle, if they are on the same terrain?

[chuckdyke]

2 hours ago, RMM said:

couldn't the battle map from the previous campaign's battle not, simply be imported into the next battle,

I don't think it is simple. I think the map needs to be reedited every time depending on every individual playing the game

[luigim]

In Engine 5 I'd like MORE PERFORMANCE:

1. LESS LOADING AND SAVING TIME (VERY ANNOYING)

2. MORE FPS PERFORMANCE AT LONG DISTANCE OF DETAIL (because a long draw distance, for trees, buildings, it's useful for situational awareness...)

[Sunbather]

@luigim Have you tried to install the game on a SSD? I load into the game within 30 to 60 seconds. Saving is almost instantly for me.

Edited March 13, 2022 by Sunbather

[chuckdyke]

36 minutes ago, Sunbather said:

@luigim Have you tried to install the game on a SSD? I load into the game within 30 to 60 seconds. Saving is almost instantly for me.

I have them loaded on a SSD drive when I travel. Play them then from my laptop. Laptop is 8GB but that was before Covid.

 

Edited March 13, 2022 by chuckdyke