Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What's the latest on the forthcoming patch? It seems a bit strange that we are halfway through the fourteenth month since 4.0 was released and we have still had absolutely nothing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...It is kind of wierd !

Since this patch will change the way the Tac AI behaves when troops comes under fire...atleast indirect fire...One would think that it would be a good idea to have it finished Before the playtesting of the upcomming modules starts...I guess it is to late for that now though...surely playtesting for the modules have been ongoing for quite some time now.

But still...It ought to be BFC priority nr 1 to get this done...to see if any tweakings needs to be made to the scenarios/Campaigns of the next releases.

Maybe they already have it finished ? but will not make it public until they release the first if these modules or something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also bad economics!

A lot of people like myself, never bothered to upgrade from 3.0, because of the problems with 4.0. We are just waiting to buy the upgrade for our games, whenever BFC get their act together.

Very strange BFC don't care about that income, and customers have to wait more than a year for a patch!

Edited by BodyBag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's more then likely that BF found out the 4.0 Upgrade has more issues then anticipated...When they find one issue, it will affect another, and both needs to be taken care of before moving forward...So, we really don't know how many total issues there are...The very fact it's taken this long does mean BF is taken this patch serious enough.

Edited by JoMc67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

The very fact it's taken this long does mean BF is taken this patch serious enough.

Not really.

It's more likely that BF has prioritized the new projects higher, and left the patch on the backburner.

There has also been very little communication from BF's side regarding the patch, although it has been brought up many times on the forum the last 14 months. Which is why we are left guessing...

Edited by BodyBag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not meant to pick on @BodyBag - but answering the questions based on his post :D At least as well as I can.

18 minutes ago, BodyBag said:

Not really.

It's more likely that BF has prioritized the new projects higher, and left the patch on the backburner.

Nope. Technically not allowed to say that - certainly not saying more.

 

18 minutes ago, BodyBag said:

There has also been very little communication from BF's side regarding the patch, although it has been brought up many times on the forum the last 14 months. Which is why we are left guessing...

Welcome to the real world. BFC does not spend a lot of time communicating every little thing they are up to. Accepting that fact will help you avoid stress related injuries :D

Here is the thing, several people have harped on this really long time frame as if way back at the beginning everyone knew and BFC accepted there was a problem. That is simply not the case! Don't get me wrong I get that people had issues with the behaviour early on but that doesn't make it an obvious bug. The AI behaviour was intentionally changed. It made the game better in a few areas. One of the things that happens when you tweak the AI is side effects creep in. I for one still have mixed views on the AI decision to stay and fight vs pull back. Our pixel troops stick it out in a nasty fight for longer than I think real troops would - plus they press the fight forward more aggressively too. But that pulling back exposed issues with withdrawing pathing to a lot more daylight and then there is the game play consideration - it's no fun to play when no one will fight. So, bottom line there was not clear bug at the beginning just vague unhappiness.

After I some more serious testing by @IICptMillerII the issues was defined and got testers and then BFC's attention. That was August.

 

with Steve acknowledging the bug in October:

 

So nothing like 14 months of ignore a problem and not planning to do anything about it.

Just so you all know....

Vague unhappiness defined by actual testing in August followed by an acknowledgement of a bug in October with a fix to come at some yet to be defined point. That is only six months elapsed time so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is also important to note that altering AI behavior is one of those items that can have unintended consequences. What appeared in 4.0 is a good example. 

“Fixing” it isn’t about eliminating the behavior so much as figuring out what is the right behavior and making sure that it does what it should and not creating a whole other set of issues. To be done right takes time.  Done wrong and we start chasing our tail using up even more time and creating more confusion. Supposition about BFs priorities is just a waste of time and frankly totally misrepresenting the situation. It is more than just unhelpful. It is simply wrong.  Y’all should know that by now so why we keep going through this cycle is beyond me. Steve has been clear saying he sees this as a priority.  The expectations that are driving commentary here are simply off base useless speculation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are just excited. 
And Steve did hint at the patch being close to release, a month ago 

On 2/1/2018 at 7:15 PM, Battlefront.com said:

Oh yes!  The Engine 4 patch.  That should be out fairly soon.  Testers have indicated the running away problem is probably fixed so we're just making sure of it.  I'd like to have the patch out much sooner than later.

Steve

 

Share this post


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

 

 

Supposition about BFs priorities is just a waste of time and frankly totally misrepresenting the situation. It is more than just unhelpful. It is simply wrong.  Y’all should know that by now so why we keep going through this cycle is beyond me. Steve has been clear saying he sees this as a priority.  The expectations that are driving commentary here are simply off base useless speculation. 

I think that BFCs decision to go for a VERY limited information sharing might actually be one of the reasons these speculations happen...

Sure...On the pluss-side...they don't have to answer all that many questions and can concentrate on working...but a negative result of this quietness...is...

SPECULATIONS ! 

 

Share this post


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

I think that BFCs decision to go for a VERY limited information sharing might actually be one of the reasons these speculations happen...

Sure...On the pluss-side...they don't have to answer all that many questions and can concentrate on working...but a negative result of this quietness...is...

SPECULATIONS ! 

 

Not to mention that the Battlefront website isn't being used to relay information about what is going on. 
Last Combat Mission related post was in April 2017. 
I don't understand why they don't post the screenshots of CM:SF2 there to let everyone who browses their website know that it is in development and will be released in 2018 (*fingers crossed*) among other things going on with the Combat Mission series. 
If you only browse the website and not the forums you might get the idea that nothing is being worked on.

Share this post


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

 The expectations that are driving commentary here are simply off base useless speculation. 

Exactly. The only material fact here is that it has been 14 months but there is still not a resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, IanL said:

^^^ someone is hard or reading :)

Nah, I am just trying to cut to the point. People make speculations, and the old guard here comes racing to the defense of Battlefront. Reading this forum is like being stuck in a time-loop.

The only point worth mentioning is that 4.0 has been out for 14 months and a fix to a problem it caused has not yet arrived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SgtHatred said:

Reading this forum is like being stuck in a time-loop.

That part I agree with. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are going to speculate, lets go big or go home. I am going to speculate the reason the 4.0 patch has not yet come out is because Charles has figured out a way to give us CMx3 and make it backwards compatible with all the old content, CMSF and CMA included. We will see an upgrade fee of $35 per title, discounted to $30 per title if you buy for three or more. The delay is all the artwork and scenario/campaign changes to all the BFC stock content. Prepare for minds to be blown! And for the usual whining and bellyaching about how it should be a free "patch"!

Edited by Heirloom_Tomato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SgtHatred said:

Nah, I am just trying to cut to the point. People make speculations, and the old guard here comes racing to the defense of Battlefront. Reading this forum is like being stuck in a time-loop.

The only point worth mentioning is that 4.0 has been out for 14 months and a fix to a problem it caused has not yet arrived.

who you calling old?  Oh wait, yeah never mind.. :(

One correction- we aren't racing to Battlefront's defense. They frankly aren't concerned about defending against mis-informed and unrealistic speculation.  We are just trying to keep that mis-information from being the only source of information to new players or infrequent visitors.  We try to be an antidote to fake news posts.  We actually care that players have all the facts to the extent they can actually be discussed.  @IanL for example gave a much more valid timeline than your 14 months would indicate.

they haven't done anything in 14 months! <---- fake news

Real news

See the difference?  Even with my old squinting eyes I can.  B)  <-- my bifocals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, sburke said:

We try to be an antidote to fake news posts.  We actually care that players have all the facts to the extent they can actually be discussed.  @IanL for example gave a much more valid timeline than your 14 months would indicate.

they haven't done anything in 14 months! <---- fake news

Real news

Yep, spot on. We all have a responsibility to call out BS or as the kids are calling it these days Fake News. We should do that everywhere. Keep in mind some people will hate you for it and be very vocal about it so be prepared. And no I am not talking about this thread - these guys are pussy cats. I have had my Scottish heritage disavowed in the most unspeakable terms on other sites. :D

 

11 hours ago, sburke said:

See the difference?  Even with my old squinting eyes I can.  B)  <-- my bifocals

LOL brilliant. No bifocals here yet. OK, OK that's cause I refused at my last eye exam and now accept that I do need them...  Damn it, it is technically true that I don't have them now. :)

PS. How is it that @sburke's awesome post about putting out the real facts has more up-votes than my actual post about the truth. :):)

PPS. Anyone who thinks that the truth doesn't win in the end - have a listen to Malcolm Gladwell's pod cast "Revisionist History" (http://revisionisthistory.com/). Oh man do some of those guys look like doofuses now. And again not talking about this thread - this is kids stuff - light weights. Fake News never lasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just stop pretending that posting some news is something so time consuming that it will affect development time, i manage a website and write news articles, it takes like 1 hour if you want to write something organised and comprehensive, posting a quick update would take 10 minutes max.

Edited by Miller786

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Miller786 said:

Let's just stop pretending that posting some news is something so time consuming that it will affect development time, i manage a website and write news articles, it takes like 1 hour if you want to write something organised and comprehensive, posting a quick update would take 10 minutes max.

LOL when you set the policy for the company that you own then you can do that.

1 hour for a comprehensive article? 10 minutes for an update? You sound like every bad manager / project manager I have ever met :D . My stock answer is "there is no such thing as a one day task".

Edited by IanL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Miller786 said:

I really dont get what you're saying, it took the devs 2 days to write that the work is going well for the patch and we should expect it shortly?

 

The whole communiction from the side of BF is a joke. People can defend it as much as they like, but their PR is not only very bad, it is almost non-existent. I don't buy nonsense like 'they must concentrate on their work', 'new information will only bring discussion and questions' and 'you can tell them how to do things once you have your own company'.

Reading this forum IS like being stuck in a time-loop and the lack of information IS causing speculation.

 

On 15-2-2018 at 4:49 PM, IanL said:

Technically not allowed to say that - certainly not saying more.

 

On 15-2-2018 at 4:49 PM, IanL said:

Welcome to the real world. BFC does not spend a lot of time communicating every little thing they are up to. Accepting that fact will help you avoid stress related injuries :D

Utter arrogance. Technically not allowed to say that....

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK this has gone form sad to pathetic to vaguely insulting. So, time to stop taking the bait.

Bottom line is BFC decides how much they communicate. Your's and anyone else's unsatisfied expectations don't really change that. I'll see some of you in a different thread. Some likely never again :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×