Brief overview of where CM is headed

[Lacroix]

Agree. It all comes down to US having better, and more optics equipment. Even all US infantry weapons come with some type of a scope vs. the iron sights of most Russian weapons so i do notice US infanty spots better. In this regard in a UKR vs RUS fight the infantry spotting should be much different, or at least I have not noticed much difference.

just had a real time cmBS urban small battle, i was russian and opponnet was american. whata disaster was that

 

t90Am waiting for abrams to arrive and hit him in his side armour, waiting for 1 minute,bam, abrams comes rotates in 0.1 seconds and blows up t90am

2nd scene: 4 americans slaughter half the platoon or routs them (all my forces and crews were crack/extreme)

3rd scene: rpg crack/extreme misses abrams, distance: 10 meters ,abrams natually then exterminate half the platoon

 

and i am not even bad player

 

i duuno what to think

 

edit:picture of russian failed ambush ,abrams was coming from that mini street to the right of my tank

 http://i.imgur.com/Fk8SYEJ.jpg

Edited July 10, 2015 by Lacroix

[Battlefront.com]

I am glad that there will be new modules (that was obvious) - I'm worried that so little has been written about version 4.0 - because it will push the series forward - scenarios, maps, vehicles, this is not progress, but simply new content.

 

This is standard procedure for us. Development involves creating a "wish list" and then picking through it to come up with the right balance of improvements (UI, graphics, game features, etc.) for a final product. This involves multiple passes to prune things which are simply not worth pursuing at the expense of other things.

For example, Feature A might be really awesome, but time consuming enough to result in not having time for B, C, and D. So is A worth more than B, C, and D? Or would it be better to do B, C, and D now and put A on the back burner? That sort of thing.

As development starts you find out things like B is going to take a lot longer to develop than expected, but D a lot less. Then you find that C isn't feasible at all and so that can allow Feature E to get substituted in its place. This process continues pretty much until the last minute. As we get closer to completion the list of things that are certain grows because we've already implemented them. The list of things that might get cut shrinks because we've had time to figure that out.

The problem with talking with you guys is that if we gave you the "wish list" you would expect them to all be implemented. Since that's never, ever a possibility it's never a smart thing to let you know what's on the list until much later in development.

That is to say, do not confuse a lack of information to you with a lack of progress behind the scenes

 

Agree. It all comes down to US having better, and more optics equipment. Even all US infantry weapons come with some type of a scope vs. the iron sights of most Russian weapons so i do notice US infanty spots better. In this regard in a UKR vs RUS fight the infantry spotting should be much different, or at least I have not noticed much difference.

This is not something that should be debated here. Really, really off topic

Steve

[c3k]

Will the broken campaigns be fixed in the CMBN battle pack?

 

The link agusto provided...

 

Oh yes, good question, Kampfgruppe Engel, one of the stock campaigns (and probably some others as well) seems to have been ruined by one of the last patches/upgrades. There was a thread about that recently. Actually i think it would be more appropriate to fix this via a patch and not via a payed module/battle pack. It' s not new content, it' s old content that got broken by a patch/upgrade and it should be working, but it isnt.

 

EDIT:

 

Here' s th thread reporting problems with the KG Engel campaign:

 

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119891-kampfgruppe-engel-new-stealth-tanks/

 

 

EDIT2:

 

Great new regarding Volkssturm/HJ btw.

 

 

...should be something you look at. It has replies by several beta testers and then an explicit statement by ChrisND that it will be examined. If a fix can be done, past history would incline one to believe a fix would be released. Perhaps not with a Battle Pack, but a patch. (Patches are free and apply to anyone who's installed the game; Packs imply a purchase.)

 

Ken

[agusto]

Thanks for the info Steve! Another question: When are we supposed to expect the Bulge game? Within Q3 2015 or Q4? Or will we have to wait until 2016?

[c3k]

ahhh damn.can we get at least children faces and perhaps sounds?

 

I am left wondering about your mental stability. There is no indication, implicit or explicit, that you were joking, sarcastic, or trying to make a deep statement on the horrors of war. Instead, you've posted a statement expressing a desire to see children in battle, with all that entails.

 

A public apology would be appropriate, or I will add you to my ignore list as I consider the type of sentiment you've expressed to be the product of a sick mind or a depraved and evil individual.

 

And then you posted this:

 

just had a real time cmBS urban small battle, i was russian and opponnet was american. whata disaster was that

 

t90Am waiting for abrams to arrive and hit him in his side armour, waiting for 1 minute,bam, abrams comes rotates in 0.1 seconds and blows up t90am

2nd scene: 4 americans slaughter half the platoon or routs them (all my forces and crews were crack/extreme)

3rd scene: rpg crack/extreme misses abrams, distance: 10 meters ,abrams natually then exterminate half the platoon

 

and i am not even bad player

 

i duuno what to think

 

edit:picture of russian failed ambush ,abrams was coming from that mini street to the right of my tank

 http://i.imgur.com/Fk8SYEJ.jpg

 

My bold. Really? Perhaps you need to rethink your opinions.

 

 

Back OT: I'm glad to hear a roadmap for further development and releases.

 

Thanks,

Ken

[agusto]

I am left wondering about your mental stability. There is no indication, implicit or explicit, that you were joking, sarcastic, or trying to make a deep statement on the horrors of war.

 

I think he was joking. At least i understood it as a joke.

[Aurelius]

c3k there is no need for ad hominems. And there is certainly no need for public apologies. He has a dark sense of humor.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Aurelius

[Lacroix]

I am left wondering about your mental stability. There is no indication, implicit or explicit, that you were joking, sarcastic, or trying to make a deep statement on the horrors of war. Instead, you've posted a statement expressing a desire to see children in battle, with all that entails.

 

A public apology would be appropriate, or I will add you to my ignore list as I consider the type of sentiment you've expressed to be the product of a sick mind or a depraved and evil individual.

 

And then you posted this:

 

 

My bold. Really? Perhaps you need to rethink your opinions.

 

 

Back OT: I'm glad to hear a roadmap for further development and releases.

 

Thanks,

Ken

even if i was serious,even if,  i dont need fake moralists to teach me lessons or sort of demand appology. how many times,when you see a homeless guy do you actually think about them? do you throw them 1 dollar? 0.1% of your income and feel good? nah , but you are more than willing to throw some humanism on the forums,from the confort of your chair

i am getting tired of ' good loving, normal' people

 

 

 i think your ability  for  detecting jokes or if nothing, not serious posts, is badly damaged, i suggest that you look into it

 

 

edit: lets not go off topic, i already got 2 warrning points for not being a good loving person

Edited July 10, 2015 by Lacroix

[Jim1954]

Do we get 55 gallon assault drums like in the movie?

[General Jack Ripper]

I would be interested to know if a fixed version of Kampfgruppe Engel will be included with the battle pack. I know the issue was reported long ago with the missing vehicles and tanks, but I haven't heard anything about a potential fix.

 

EDIT: Whoops, looks like I was ninja'd on page four. Maybe I shouldn't write a post while I'm still on page three.

Edited July 10, 2015 by SLIM

[SgtHatred]

But with Upgrade 4.0 still using the outdated CMx2 engine i doubt we will see much improvement in key areas.

Instead on focusing on keeping the old car driving through the addition of a new oil filter, a spoiler and new tires it would be time to move on and invest into a new car.

If money or know-how is the problem...well there is kickstarter, i think we all would support you.

Another thing i dont like is that we now have it Official, the bulge game will only include "minor" changes.

No new trench/foxhole system. No significant gameplay enhancements, no fix for long standing technical issues.

Sorry, iam disappointed !

(But thanks for the heads-up Steve)

 

I'm probably one of the biggest critics of BFC when it comes to software quality and some of the openGL beginner-itis with the game engine, but I don't think this is true at all. Performance on my ungodly-mega computer is substantially better with 1.3 compared to earlier versions, which also brought things like WEGO multiplayer. Lots of little things could still add up.

 

Not interested in the Battle pack (single player wargames are meh to me) but I'll be purchasing Bulge and every other module day 1.

Edited July 10, 2015 by SgtHatred

[Erwin]

Excellent news.  Thank you.

[Sequoia]

Wow, C3K has never been called a good loving normal person before in any of these forums.

[General Jack Ripper]

I'm probably one of the biggest critics of BFC when it comes to software quality and some of the openGL beginner-itis with the game engine, but I don't think this is true at all. Performance on my ungodly-mega computer is substantially better with 1.3 compared to earlier versions, which also brought things like WEGO multiplayer. Lots of little things could still add up.

 

I agree. The performance and texture rendering in the game have come a long way since the earliest days of Shock Force. Battlefront well understands their customers don't all own thousand dollar hypermachines, and they've made it a stated goal to steadily improve performance for older computers.

Even if they insisted the "blue bar" idea was delusional, they still put it back in to appease the masses. Try getting that sort of service from a AAA developer!

 

Wow, C3K has never been called a good loving normal person before in any of these forums.

 

My eyes almost bugged out of my head at that one.

Edited July 10, 2015 by SLIM

[Sequoia]

Back on topic, I'm looking forward to Normandy scenarios and/or campaigns with Airborne troops, flame and aa weapons on both sides.

[c3k]

Wow, C3K has never been called a good loving normal person before in any of these forums.

 

Yeah, that gets a LOL and a possible sig quote.

[niall78]

Do we get 55 gallon assault drums like in the movie?

 

Will the King Tiger be modelled as an M47 Patton?

[Wiggum15]

I agree. The performance and texture rendering in the game have come a long way since the earliest days of Shock Force. Battlefront well understands their customers don't all own thousand dollar hypermachines, and they've made it a stated goal to steadily improve performance for older computers.

The problem is that CMx2 runs rather badly even on some, high-end PC's (drops below 25FPS on medium sized battle) if you not significantly reduce details (mostly models).

That should not happen.

Also, the loading times are too long. Loading big CMBS scenarios takes me and others 5min...

I hope this can be greatly improved !

@ Steve

Im not trying to Troll.

Would a troll have supported you by buying CMAK, CMSF, Marines Module, British Module, CMBN, v3.0 Upgrade and CMBS !

All i do is criticize some aspects.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Wiggum15

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Appreciate the update. 

 

Revolutionary comes when it's ready.  In the meantime, all the new evolutionary on the horizon makes me happy.

[PhilM]

 

 

Not interested in the Battle pack (single player wargames are meh to me) but I'll be purchasing Bulge and every other module day 1.

 

My reading of Steve's post was that the Pack will include (two player) scenarios, as well as (single player) campaigns ... so it won't be just single player content?

 

I see it as a welcome way of using VP content in pre-made battles (scenarios and campaigns) rather than just via QBs ...?

[Bulletpoint]

I am left wondering about your mental stability. There is no indication, implicit or explicit, that you were joking, sarcastic, or trying to make a deep statement on the horrors of war. Instead, you've posted a statement expressing a desire to see children in battle, with all that entails.

 

A public apology would be appropriate, or I will add you to my ignore list as I consider the type of sentiment you've expressed to be the product of a sick mind or a depraved and evil individual.

 

 

Look who's talking

[sburke]

All i do is criticize some aspects.

No fair! I almost choked on my sandwich. My wife was about to start with the Heimlich maneuver. You gotta warn people before tossing things like that out there.

[grunt_GI]

Great news on the Campaign/Scenario Pack for CMBN...and all the other goodies.

 

GEEK question...I have put off buying the CMBN vehicle pack because didn't really care for "funnies"...however, I do remember that the Vehicle Pack also had the 3.10 patch in it...

 

NOW that I have my CMBN all patched up to 3.11 which I assume many players do...does that Vehicle Pack still contain that patch?  

 

Will that mess up anything?

 

Reason I ask is I did the regular Mac 3.11 patch and it was a disaster...had to spend 3 days on tech support before your guy cleverly figured out that the Mac version did not install the 3.10brz file which I had to download and manually install...only patch from BFC I ever had issues with!!

 

SO, would like to avoid any issues if I buy the Vehicle Pack NOW to play all the new content.

 

Thanks

[BLSTK]

Thank you, BFC.

 

Let the Games begin!

[waclaw]

 

This is standard procedure for us. Development involves creating a "wish list" and then picking through it to come up with the right balance of improvements (UI, graphics, game features, etc.) for a final product. This involves multiple passes to prune things which are simply not worth pursuing at the expense of other things.

For example, Feature A might be really awesome, but time consuming enough to result in not having time for B, C, and D. So is A worth more than B, C, and D? Or would it be better to do B, C, and D now and put A on the back burner? That sort of thing.

As development starts you find out things like B is going to take a lot longer to develop than expected, but D a lot less. Then you find that C isn't feasible at all and so that can allow Feature E to get substituted in its place. This process continues pretty much until the last minute. As we get closer to completion the list of things that are certain grows because we've already implemented them. The list of things that might get cut shrinks because we've had time to figure that out.

The problem with talking with you guys is that if we gave you the "wish list" you would expect them to all be implemented. Since that's never, ever a possibility it's never a smart thing to let you know what's on the list until much later in development.

That is to say, do not confuse a lack of information to you with a lack of progress behind the scenes

 

This is not something that should be debated here. Really, really off topic

Steve

 

I understand, but write what you want to improve in version 4.0 (something from this list wishes) - eg. add beautiful explosions, change the UI, etc. - These are much more important than the information about new modules - bought CMBN, CMA, CMRT, CMSF, CMFI, CMBS and all modules - I have plenty of scenarios to play - now more interested in the mechanics and graphics - ie version 4.0

 

- Many of the players are in such a situation (recently deleted threads) - give us some hope!

Edited July 10, 2015 by waclaw