choppinlt

Channeling my best Monty Python "I'm not dead yet". To say things are going great would be an exaggeration, BUT progress is being made...albeit very slow.

Two months ago I would have said yes, however I am happy to report that things are looking up. We are currently way behind our schedule, but my developer has recovered from his health scare. So things are looking up, but I am guarding my optimism. We hope to post something significant in a month or two.

Greetings snarre, I have no major updates to share. I can tell you that we are waaay behind our anticipated schedule due to a series of health issues from our lead developer. So stay tuned and cross your fingers so we can have a breakthrough.

Hi snarre, that has yet to be determined, but when the time comes we will make sure the word gets out!

Thanks gents! Our forum is the best place to see updates, and the status of the game. Progress is being made, and we are closer every day to a very rough/basic game play demo. As a reminder, Theater of Operations is an operational level game. As a long time CM player myself, I have always wanted a campaign layer. So a feature of the operational level game will allow players to give inputs on tactical battles that develop (being able to use it as a campaign layer). The concepts are shown in different threads on our forum for those that have not seen it. On initial release, battle data will be input manually by players. We *hope* to develop an automated feature for battle data transfer with CM, but nothing happens until we get TOO released. Love the questions and the interest. Success depends on this community's support!

Yes, we are continuing development and progress is good. Not too much else to say at this point, but come over to our forum below and join in the conversation or see more updates. In the meantime wish us luck!

Hi all, development has begun! We have only been going at this for about 4 weeks, so there isn't anything to show. Feel free to follow along on the forum below and watch how things are taking shape. Again there isn't much to talk about at the moment, but give it another month and there should be some things to see.

Hey all, I just wanted to give a quick update. We have come to tentative agreement to start full development in approximately 2 weeks! The devs are people I know and have dealt with before, and they live locally. This has several obvious advantages going forward. While nothing is guaranteed yet, I'm confident enough to make this announcement. Check out the forum link below so you can stay up to date on the project.

Thanks, I appreciate the well wishes and support. CMC got quite a ways through production, but landed just short of the finish as I recall. Anyway, we have a LONG way to go! Keep your fingers crossed.

Hello Agusto, and thanks for your reply and interest! BLUF(Bottom Line Up Front)- I have gotten very serious about attaining funding for this project. In fact as of yesterday I have a few different funding offers on the table, so I am currently evaluating them. With funding will come full time professional computer development, so at the moment things are looking good for getting this fully under way...but nothing is guaranteed yet... Please read on as I address the rest of your post. It sounds like you have a skill set that could be of great benefit to this project. If you would like to discuss further, send me a PM. My operational game's name is Theater of Operations (TOO). TOO will be a fully functioning standalone/independent operational level game. That means no other game/software is needed to play it, HOWEVER I am designing TOO in such a way that it can give an order of battle (OOB) to players that *want* to play out the battle on the tactical battlefield i.e. you don't have to play it out. Most battles will probably NOT be played out on the tactical battlefield for sheer time purposes, but TOO would automatically resolve the battles with its combat engine. Most likely the early version of TOO won't include a fully automated data transfer process between TOO and CM, BUT the goal is to have one eventually. I have talked to the guys here are BFC and this is definitely all on the table, but I need to get TOO developed first. So when a battle of interest occurs players can get the OOB and set up the battles in CM i.e. they manually set up the battles. This is all a means to an end, because I want to stress that the attainable goal will be to have an automatic data transfer process. A good example of what I am talking about exists. Some of you may be familiar with Field of Glory: Empires which came out in 2019. This is a standalone diplomatic level game, but if a player wants to fight out a battle tactically, a process was developed to let them play it out using Field of Glory 2. Despite the similarity in names, they are 2 completely different games...they share the same publisher, so this is a fair comparison. Where does TOO stand? I have developed 90% of the game mechanics and algorithms. It is ready for beta testing. I have a fully functioning combat resolution system that gives very reasonable results. Go to my forum (link is at my footer) and you can see a manual playthrough we did of a St. Lo scenario. A battle or two was played out with CM to demonstrate that concept as well. While the game mechanics are mature, I need professionals to make it in to software. The plan is to use Unity. Why am I wanting to develop a full game? Because that is where my interest lies for one. Secondly it has to do with the market. I can create a operational level game that will appeal to the operational market and the portion of the tactical market that is looking for a campaign system. There is more, but I will leave it there for now. Check out the forum, look around and feel free to join the conversation over there!

Yes, but do you know where I can find one of those? I had a local dedicated programmer for this project....and then life get's in the way! I have been doing a lot of searching lately in particular. I have gotten plenty of interest, but finding the person with the right skills, motivation and perhaps most importantly price has been elusive. But the search goes on.

Thanks, i hope we find someone too! I will clarify that I have found several developers willing to do this. But the key is to find the right developer, at the right price, at the right time. So it is that combination that has been difficult thus far. Feel free to check in at any time, as you can see I do monitor this thread.

I tried a Kickstarter in 2015 and it failed. Perhaps my biggest takeaway was that people needed to see the game in action before they would consider funding it....but a lack of initial funding prevents development of a tangible prototype. Though I am having various conversations on contracting for a prototype, so I may revisit crowdsourcing before this is all over. I will add that while this project has been in limbo, it feels like I am only a step or two away from development. I have met and talked to a lot of names in the war gaming business who have been quite helpful, to include the guys here at BFC. So all of this will be helpful once the dam breaks on getting a developer.

Hello snarre! Is the project dead? No... I am actively trying to get the programming help I need to make it happen. We had a programmer and on the eve of full development a couple years ago he had to back out for personal reasons. So I have been trying to find a developer, but funding is the primary limiting factor. So while this project is not dead, I must add that we haven't gone far with development in the last few years. The game mechanics are ready, we just need a programmer (or a war chest to hire one) to make this happen.

Hi Bulletpoint! If you are referring to the attached list in terms of scope creep, then no I don't believe that is the case. Most things on that list is a unit characteristic that impacts game algorithms in different ways. While game mechanics have evolved, the core scope of the game has been the same since I made this announcement. Much of what is seen on the forum are deep explanations on many of the different game concepts and characteristics. You ask if I have considered a simple version to push units around? No that is not under consideration for a variety of different reasons. I am using Vassal to create the mock-up images for the test scenario, but I have not set it up to have any deeper functionality than to generate pictures. Vassal may be of some use to you, and do some or all of what you are talking about. BFC has long told me that their market analysis tells them that the demand for a campaign layer to their CM games is not high enough to justify the risk and the cost of producing one. My recent experience backs up what they were telling me, so it is best to create something that can reach a wider market in hopes of making something close to sustainable. That is why my goal has been to create a standalone operational level game that has features built in to allow flexibility for playing out tactical battles. In other words if I can appeal to multiple niche markets then we have a chance.