A not very exciting Christmas Bone this year

[kohlenklau]

[sburke]

For those of you who don't understand why someone who develops games would be using such a VERY outdated OS... it's because I have several thousands of Dollars worth of software to replace if I upgrade to anything newer.  I know I'm just putting off the inevitable

 

Steve

 

pfft just do CM Fulda Gap and it will pay for it 

[Sequoia]

Tank riders are in, yay!

 

I wouldn't say for sure they're in until we get a more than a possibly misunderstood yes answer to a 2 part question.

[borg]

Maybe we should try ask 'gently' a question to Steve that is not double-barrelled .

 

Hence, 

 

Dear Steve, if you are still in a good and giving mood as you were during XMAS - will you tell us whether

 

1) there will be tank riders in 'CM-BotB/Ardenne' ?

 

and

 

2) Is there love/goodies coming our way for CMFI+GL ?

 

and whilst we are at it.... how about

 

3) CMRT. Any hints yet ? Let's assume you can give us a closing remark for Year 2014 ! Which i think... was a Good-Year for Battlefront in general.

[sburke]

Maybe we should try ask 'gently' a question to Steve that is not double-barrelled .

 

Hence, 

 

Dear Steve, if you are still in a good and giving mood as you were during XMAS - will you tell us whether

 

1) there will be tank riders in 'CM-BotB/Ardenne' ?

 

and

 

2) Is there love/goodies coming our way for CMFI+GL ?

 

and whilst we are at it.... how about

 

3) CMRT. Any hints yet ? Let's assume you can give us a closing remark for Year 2014 ! Which i think... was a Good-Year for Battlefront in general.

 

Yes.

 

 

Yes, but only for people in Ljubljana.  It's one of my favorite cities in the world so you get a few special favors

 

 

We have not officially ended development on CMBN content.  Besides future Upgrades, which are a sure thing, we are still thinking about doing various Packs.  However, for now we're focusing on a few other areas.

 

Getting back to some questions about future content for Red Thunder and Fortress Italy. We are planning more content for both of these as well.  Next up for both will be Modules to carry the theaters to the end of the war.  We do not have timeframes yet for either one.

 

Steve

 

His initial answer of yes was to Tank riders.  He elaborated to the extent he could on the second question at the end.  To the extent of what you are going to get for now he has answered both questions.

[borg]

Thanks sburke

Do u ppl ever sleep ?

Im passing from a phase where I sleep, wake, play CM, shower , play CM, sleep & wake and play CM - again !

[[MyIS] Buffpuff]

 

 

 

Fair enough - cant really argue with that. To me the perfect QB system is what we currently have, which is great, but with the COMBINED ARMS setting back and a way to enforce the FIONNs SHORT 75 rules ingame (boy, when was the last time you heard someone bring up Fionn's Short 75 rules? Who even remembers that anymore?). 

 

See now you're just going old school and making me want to dust off CMBO. I'm hoping the Ardennes brings back glorious memories of my pixel soldiers slugging through "deep snow" and winter camo Panthers brewing in their glory. Man those were the good 'ole days right there!!!

[sburke]

Thanks sburke

Do u ppl ever sleep ?

Im passing from a phase where I sleep, wake, play CM, shower , play CM, sleep & wake and play CM - again !

I am on holiday break so I can skip the showers. 

 

Seriously though, my time goes back and forth.  Yesterday was out running around most of the day.  When home I flip back and forth between the various CM games mostly making maps, doing some testing and then comments for the forum (mostly driven first by stuff I run across testing I need to post or ticket and then the general forum just to see what's up).  Then reading a bit on stuff that currently interests me which is usually to do with something in CM I'd like to recreate and once in a while I fit in home stuff..   heh heh  Actually hoping to get some time in this week building a new dresser for the wife.  We will see if I can finish before end of holiday break.

 

Am on Pacific time, but I like getting up early to coffee, so there is a stretch of some 17 hours where you might see me really online.

[Sim1943]

See now you're just going old school and making me want to dust off CMBO. I'm hoping the Ardennes brings back glorious memories of my pixel soldiers slugging through "deep snow" and winter camo Panthers brewing in their glory. Man those were the good 'ole days right there!!!

It makes me want to type: QB ME 1500 PTS SHORT 75 and then log the results at Rugged Defense. Fond memories for sure. can't believe that was 14 years ago!

[Aragorn2002]

Now how about those screenshots, Steve?

[Ithikial_AU]

Brilliant news! Looking forward to it.

[Michael Emrys]

Patton ordered the creation of what were called "Expedient Jumbos" because even he couldn't get enough of the production versions. This is pretty shocking when you consider that Patton was the one who screamed "bloody murder!" over field expedients such as logs and sandbags because the additional weight broke down suspensions.

 

True. Nevertheless, experience is a mighty changer of priorities.

 

 

Michael

[PanzerMike]

like Sburke said: tankriders are go. Fer sure. Definitely. Woooot!

[borg]

i think Ardennes/BotB will be a blast. considering theres a 1945 - 2015 Anniversary !

Edited December 30, 2014 by borg

[borg]

so.... will we see Belgian and/or Luxembourgish armies as well ? 

[womble]

I don't expect the Luxembourgois were quite up to fielding an army having been liberated for a matter of months, especially having been neutral before the war... though Wiki claims the 30 veteran partisans of the Battle of Vianden Castle that November assisted the US troops. Wiki tells me the Free Belgian brigade wasn't there in the Ardenned, but that the Belgians had managed to raise 57 Fusilier Battalions post-liberation and that the 5th Bttn fought at the Battle of the Bulge.

 

Probably not quite enough for them to be present in the parent product of a new family. Possibly enough to get into a later Pack.

[Ales Dvorak]

We are no longer officially supporting 10.6.x, however we are not doing anything specific to prevent it from running on 10.6.8.  Which means which means it's possible that us 10.6.8 users (and yes, I am right there with you!) will be able to play Black Sea or Ardennes just fine, but we might not be.  If there are stability or graphics problems for 10.6.8 users then the standard response from Battlefront is "upgrade your OS".

Thank you for clarifying this. OS 10.6 is very stable for music production and I have a lot of music software ... so lot to upgrade...I'm right there with you.

Greetings from Ljubljana and happy New Year.

[Trooper117]

Great news in this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Stele]

Great news! Looking forward to this one in particular. I'm just in the middle of reading Stackpole Book's Kampfgruppe Peiper at the Battle of the Bulge.

[Taranis]

@Steve:

Will it be possible to adding "mix" in the QB's faction selection? Like it is in the editor

It will be a nice addition. On that way, in CMFI, 504's Tigers can fight with Hermann Göring. On CMBN, kriegsmarine soldiers will fight with SS of Von Tettau's Kampfgruppe, and formed Kampfgruppen like it was in reality.

According to me, Kriegsmarine will be played more commonly and it will not be more unbalanced than an Italian Infantry only VS US Tank.

Thank you !

PS: Keep that way, CM rocks!

[womble]

@Steve:

Will it be possible to adding "mix" in the QB's faction selection? Like it is in the editor

I don't think they'll ever be doing this. BFC's general approach to QB force selection is to remain restrictive rather than loosen up the possibilities. Allowing free choice of all the arms of any given side would, it seems to me, be going too far for them to be comfortable with that level of cherry-picking.

It will be a nice addition. On that way, in CMFI, 504's Tigers can fight with Hermann Göring. On CMBN, kriegsmarine soldiers will fight with SS of Von Tettau's Kampfgruppe, and formed Kampfgruppen like it was in reality.

If that's what you want, make a scenario. QBs have only a passing acquaintance with "reality" in the first place...

According to me, Kriegsmarine will be played more commonly...

Why would you pick Kriegsmarine in a QB where you could have FJ or PzGr? They don't have the support assets you need or the organic firepower. While you could get lots of them, that's just more targets for the enemy.

[Big Boss]

I think the German name for the Battle of the Bulge was changed to Unternehmen Herbstnebel shortly before the offensive started. Before that it went under the much more recognizable Wacht am Rhein.

[Taranis]

I don't think they'll ever be doing this. BFC's general approach to QB force selection is to remain restrictive rather than loosen up the possibilities. Allowing free choice of all the arms of any given side would, it seems to me, be going too far for them to be comfortable with that level of cherry-picking.

If that's what you want, make a scenario. QBs have only a passing acquaintance with "reality" in the first place...

Why would you pick Kriegsmarine in a QB where you could have FJ or PzGr? They don't have the support assets you need or the organic firepower. While you could get lots of them, that's just more targets for the enemy.

Firstly, thank you, for your reply and your opinion.

I think that making scenario each time would be lots of work for only few plays hours. QBs are fast to set up, it's why they're my favorites. Moreover, (i'm not expert) I think it's not super hard to add this option. It will not be an obligation for the player, who, if he want, can play only one faction (IA too).

Kriegsmarine: only for fun and originality. It's why i think, it would be nice to make "kampfgruppen", because (according to me) actually they're near of useless. An other example (just for fun ^^), the B1 Flammpanzers (221.pz-Kp?)from Heer served with SS-Schule (Kampfgruppe Von Tettau). 

An other reason why play Kriegsmarine infantry. They will be cheap infantry, so the player will have more money for tank units and use them for "aggressive scouting". In my opinion, it can make good tacticals problems.

Sorry, if i've got bad English.

Thank's for reading !

 

Edited January 5, 2015 by ironsturm

[womble]

Firstly, thank you, for your reply and your opinion.

I think that making scenario each time would be lots of work for only few plays hours.

Not really. If you're playing against the AI, the defender doesn't even really need a plan, though the fog of war would be pretty much busted. And if you're expecting the AI to attack competently in a QB, you are, I'm afraid, dreaming. You can build a scenario on any of the QB maps, and they'll even have a defender AI plan already implemented if you select it the right way round.

Moreover, (i'm not expert) I think it's not super hard to add this option.

Well, by the same token, it wouldn't be too hard to add the points values from the QB selection screen into the scenario force editor, either, but BFC don't have any inclination to do that, and it would have far less effect on the areas where they are concerned. BFC just don't want their game to be used to set up cherry-picked, "ultra-optimised" thoroughly ahistorical force compositions (FJ mounted in Hanomags with King Tiger support, to pick a hyperbolic example), that's why they don't want to put the same possibilities into the QB editor that are in the Scenario editor. At least as I understand their position on QBs. It took a deal of wrangling to get the freedom we currently have to select forces in QBs, in the transition from Shock Force to BN.

Kriegsmarine: only for fun and originality.

It's sometimes difficult to argue that a feature should be included to make things more realistic if you then illustrate this argument by a "just for fun" speculative force composition.

[Taranis]

Not really. If you're playing against the AI, the defender doesn't even really need a plan, though the fog of war would be pretty much busted. And if you're expecting the AI to attack competently in a QB, you are, I'm afraid, dreaming. You can build a scenario on any of the QB maps, and they'll even have a defender AI plan already implemented if you select it the right way round.

 

If I load a QB map in the editor, will there be an AI attack plan(from the QB)? I know that the AI plans are not really difficult but I think it's always better than knowing it in advance (if i created my own AI attack plan).

 

Well, by the same token, it wouldn't be too hard to add the points values from the QB selection screen into the scenario force editor, either, but BFC don't have any inclination to do that, and it would have far less effect on the areas where they are concerned. BFC just don't want their game to be used to set up cherry-picked, "ultra-optimised" thoroughly ahistorical force compositions (FJ mounted in Hanomags with King Tiger support, to pick a hyperbolic example), that's why they don't want to put the same possibilities into the QB editor that are in the Scenario editor. At least as I understand their position on QBs. It took a deal of wrangling to get the freedom we currently have to select forces in QBs, in the transition from Shock Force to BN.

I agree but elite troops with elite support need "elite money". I think that values already resolves all that problems. Moreover if player put a great purchase value, it's because it's what he want.

 

It's sometimes difficult to argue that a feature should be included to make things more realistic if you then illustrate this argument by a "just for fun" speculative force composition.

I said that for arguing why playing KM. You can play it historicaly (like i want) or if you're more casual, you can play it for fun or because they're cheap.

Thank you again !