Jump to content
MOS:96B2P

Updating Shock Force

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, ncc1701e said:

This is indeed the purpose of Battle packs. And, I would be happy to pay from them.

Upgrading Shock Force is a huge task. I think we must be realists. BF needs to concentrate on adding content in terms of units/terrains/armies to the latest engine. So that scenario designers could play with, either creating Battle packs either delivering them free.

I am learning the editor right now, finally I should say. Creating a scenario is time consuming indeed but there are well done tutorials out there to help. And, this is entertaining too.

Good to hear - if you come across any scenario design problems or want to bounce ideas off me feel free to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ncc1701e said:

Thank you - will let you know if I have any problem. I am at the easy part (map drawing). :)

Not if you're doing a map based on real terrain ... it can be slow and painful but you're right the mechanics are pretty easy.  My top tip is to make sure that you pay attention to your buildings and make sure that doors and windows line up where you have buildings joined together and of course make sure that troops can enter them if they are designed to be entered.  Keep at it :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find map making to be one of the hardest tasks, kudos to all the map makers out there, your patience and creativity is remarkable.

Scripting for the AI is just a matter of experimentation, trial & error and lots of repetition in my experience.....So far I've mostly restricted myself to the CMx2 engine (CM:A & CM:SF) as I figure if I can suss those two out, I'm a fair way towards learning the rest.

PS - I enjoy scripting for CM:A the most as it seems to be the closest in terms of balance.....The pre-scripted fire-fights don't always end how you expect they will, even before the player gets involved!

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much great content for a Middle East Shock Force module for CMBS already exists in various existing game families. If I didn't have a day job I feel like I could knock out a reasonable beta version myself....  

1. CMBS has the basic unit sets for US Army to fight a legacy Bloc army like Saddam's or Assad's.

It also has good maps for industrial estates and steppes and the hilly farmland resembles a lot of less arid Mideast upland areas (Turkey, Iran), with some mild de-treeing, shallower watercourses and tweaks to building textures.

2.  CMFI has a bunch of tremendous maps. Sicily/ Calabria are much of a likeness to the Levant, with just a bit of texture work, and clusters of postwar construction and doodads added.

3.  CMA content is presumably more limited in terms of its access, due to licensing, but the maps are in a grey area and likely could be repurposed.

4. CMSF offers a lot of textures and doodads that are readily plugged straight into the newer engine. Many of the open desert maps would require very little work. 

CMSF also has the OB, wireframes, textures and basic weapons data for numerous armies. No doubt some adjustment to this data is required to forward port, but ground work is here. I'd advocate BFC include British Army and Uncons in the module (so they can also fight in Ukraine), then offer the additional NATO forces and USMC as separate purchase unit packs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the forums I visit regularly is Grogheads. There is a recent discussion on their computer wargames sub-forum entitled 'programmers at bfc', which has quotes from Steve saying that CMSF2 is a priority for 2017. There is also other news re other modules and packs. I can't vouch for it, but it does seem genuine - and great news if true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Petrus58 said:

One of the forums I visit regularly is Grogheads. There is a recent discussion on their computer wargames sub-forum entitled 'programmers at bfc', which has quotes from Steve saying that CMSF2 is a priority for 2017. There is also other news re other modules and packs. I can't vouch for it, but it does seem genuine - and great news if true.

Wow ! I never visited that site - I just googled it - and saw it. Funny - I never recalled an official confirmation of CMSFII on these fora let alone in 2017 ! Can we believe this ? It would be #awesomeness if correct. Can't wait to see the Middle East in its engine 4.0 glory beating dust and afghan mountains 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

As previously noted, I will contribute an updated Ramadi and Baba Amr to the cause.

>:) you don't mean you're already working on an engine 4.0 upgrade of CMSF maps? :ph34r:

Thanks man !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎15‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 4:14 PM, Erwin said:

I tried creating scenarios in CM1 but that was MUCH easier than in CM2.  Don't have the talent or patience to try to figure out the CM2 editor.  That's a real problem for content creation in CM2 and why we have a steadily decreasing quantity of user-made scenarios after each new CM2 release.

I wouldn't say it's complex, just fiddly and time consuming.....From what I'm discovering, either in threads here, or by my own experiments with Trumpton (CM:SF), the Engine 4 editor is a much more precise and sophisticated tool than what we can sometimes struggle with in CM:A/CM:SF (and you only have to look at some of the awesome scenarios created using those older engines to see just how good content for an Engine 4 version of either title could be).

Plus if a pro ISIS faction starts trolling the forum we can just call in the spooks and watch the fireworks.....Maybe get a brief (& one sided) uncon scenario out of it to boot!  :lol:

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Petrus58 said:

One of the forums I visit regularly is Grogheads. There is a recent discussion on their computer wargames sub-forum entitled 'programmers at bfc', which has quotes from Steve saying that CMSF2 is a priority for 2017. There is also other news re other modules and packs. I can't vouch for it, but it does seem genuine - and great news if true.

This is the thread ...

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=19156.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Petrus58 said:

One of the forums I visit regularly is Grogheads. There is a recent discussion on their computer wargames sub-forum entitled 'programmers at bfc', which has quotes from Steve saying that CMSF2 is a priority for 2017.

That would be wonderful!  Am enjoying playing CMSF (and even CMA) these days as got burned on by the sameness of the WW2 titles.  Love the desert vistas and sun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am continuing to mull over the recent (unofficial) reconfirmation by Steve that BFC is up for the effort of:

(A) re-releasing CMSF v4.0 with the 2008 vintage mythos and TO&E, as opposed to

(B) an all new Mideast game family with new content and updated TOE/backstory, or

(C) a CMBS module + unit packs with modest new scenario content, but adding dry terrain and NATO, Uncon, Syrian army TO&Es

I continue to wonder about the commercial wisdom, as well as the workload involved, in that choice, and am keen to hear your views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.... It would seem to me that the primary purchasing market for (A) would be the same gamers who bought and liked original CMSF, and to a lesser extent European gamers eager to see their own armies represented in a game. But these same groups would also like options B and C. Where's the *new* buyer group who will shell out up to $200 to beat up a 2008-vintage Assad army using a slightly dated NATO force set?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the existing (excellent) scenarios and campaigns for CMSF would be usable in CMSFII than "A" would be the best option by far.  Am sure we will never get the quantity (or quality) of content in a brand new CMSF version.

On the other hand, if it means creating content from scratch, then "B" would be preferable. 

"C" sounds like it would be a minor add-on and not satisfying in terms of depth or content.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the 'hype' and to be honest, reality - what are now the chances of having 'Special Forces' embedded in new CMSFII.

Besides the 2,000 (or more?) USMC deployed in Kuwait. There is a lot of talk of SF ops in the battle and WOT in the Middle East. I could really really really, do with some of these guys, in niche missions and scenarios. Maybe NOT full blow campaigns.. but I hope and wish that some will agree with me here. 

What the hell, the community went also far as creating Op Neptune Spear (which is a MUST HAVE, MUST PLAY btw), by @Combatintman (hats off), and labelled the Guys as Seal Team 6. Even in CMBS, there are a couple of scenarios with squads labeled as seals. 

They need not be seals, I also enjoy the 75th Ranger Regiment, Delta. etc.

AM I saying something completely stupid here ? 

Thanks Guys.

God damn, I wish @Battlefront.com can pop by and slot a few words in the CMSF forum :) 

Edited by borg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A SEAL friend of mine used to say that if spec operators are fighting as infantry something is badly wrong. If there is to be shooting, they expect to start it, end it in no more than 2 clips, then vanish, leaving the bad guys shooting at empty air.

Ranger and other commando actions though could certainly be appropriate to the CM scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erwin, as a veteran scenario designer, I just have a feeling that a lot of the pre-NATO CMSF scenarios and maps are either going to need to be totally redesigned or else replaced (and frankly, some of them sucked).

If that proves true, they may as well do new content at that point (thus, B), with updated forces and a more contemporary storyline. For example I'd love to see Turkish forces - very easy to imagine them fighting all comers, not just Assad and Uncons/ peshmerga.

And having done the work for Brits,  NATO, Marines etc., it's easy to port them over to Black Sea. And also to bring the Russians to Syria... or Turkey. 

CMSF: ARMAGEDDON

****

Also, the core subject of original CMSF was Stryker brigades. This force concept proved deficient in practice, as did the vehicle. The world has moved on. Wargaming it today is kind of like a warbird simulator featuring 1930s aircraft like the Brewster Buffalo, Mitsubishi type 97 and I-16 Rata

Edited by LongLeftFlank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...I'd love to see Turkish forces..."

+1 

I have 532 CMSF scenarios, and 54 CMSF campaigns in my CMSF folders.  (Compare to 40 CMFB scenarios and 7 CMFB campaigns.)   Maybe many of the earlier CMSF scenarios sucked.  But, it was the only CM2 game in town for 5(?)years and some designers became very good.  So, there are many very good to xnt CMSF offerings that it would be a shame to lose.  I doubt many will get redone.  Unless maybe BF professionally redoes a few dozen of the best and we buy that content as a separate purchase.  I would pay for that.

"...having done the work for Brits,  NATO, Marines etc., it's easy to port them over to Black Sea. And also to bring the Russians to Syria... or Turkey."

So, you think that option "C" may be best?  If the above is true, that's a point in "C's" favor.

"...the core subject of original CMSF was Stryker brigades."   Yes, but one can create any formation one wants and not have Stryker Bdes..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall, I asked what would happen to all the earlier CMSF scenarios if it was upgraded to the latest engine.

I was told they would "probably" work but of course, their AI would be the older AI without any of the new features.

I agree that a "BEST OF CMSF" Battle/Scenario pack would be awesome...DAMN, I did not realize their were so many Campaigns and Scenarios...I had about 30 Campaigns and 300 Scenarios and I thought that was a lot.

Still, I would totally pay another $50 for an upgraded Mac version...I still play it a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...