Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

It's definitely entered into our thinking, though I'm not sure how the future will proceed.  The primary dilemma we have is that the price of what we release needs to be proportional to the effort that went into it.  CMFB, for example, was a major project for us and charging $35 as a Module for CMBN would not have been worth it to us.

That said, I think our perspective on Families and expansions has evolved over the past 10 years.  I do expect to see changes from us in the future.

I had the idea last year but never post it here since I found it was crazy. It is still crazy today but since you are talking about possible changes in the future.

Well, here it is.

You have an engine. You have families. You have modules / battle packs. Why not suppress the family level?

I am thinking of something like DCS world, call it Combat Mission world.

Each family installs in Combat Mission world just like a module. Of course, raise the price of family/module according to the effort needed to develop it.

That way, you have one engine / one patch? Well I have no idea, I am guessing.

The other advantage is that one can play the army he wants if he has bought the family/module of course.

That could led to interesting things like if someone own CMSF2 and CMBS, we could have the latest M1 (CMBS) against T55 (CMSF).
Or some idiot uchrony like a T90 (CMSF) against a platoon of Tiger (CMBN). No interest here but at least I'll give it a try just once. :D

Crazy? Indeed!

Thanks for the update Steve ! :wub:

Share this post


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

You have an engine. You have families. You have modules / battle packs. Why not suppress the family level?

I am thinking of something like DCS world, call it Combat Mission world.

Works great in theory (and I've certainly wanted it!), however there's a lot of code complications with having a multi-purpose open-ended central game engine and everything is considered an "add on".  Simply put, the code was not designed for this and Charles has definitively said it's not feasible to put it in now.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update an info Steve.  Truly excited for CMSF2.  I have to admit i stopped playing all the other families because of the morale/cover bug so im looking forward to dusting off my games when the patch comes out.  I new it would all turn out well in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wonderful thing about CMSF2 (and CMRT as well) is that it will be very amenable for designing scenarios using MOS' very innovative concepts (involving many types of INTEL) that he is pioneering in his TOC scenario - (conducting COIN (Counterinsurgency) and low-intensity ops. 

Maybe even partisan ops in Yugoslavia if suitable mods are created for CMFI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important TO&E changes is getting rid of the artificial requirement that a Team be the head of a Formation.  That ran into regular problems with Syrians, Germans, and Dutch in particular.  Especially with Rifle formations.  Since Engine 3 we've allowed Squads to fulfill that role, which means a German Rifle Squad, for example, consists of 4 Squads instead of 2 Teams and 3 Squads.  This isn't just cosmetic as anybody whose played CM knows.  There's pros and cons to Squads whole vs. split.  With CMSF1 there was no player choice, now there is.

Changes like this do not automatically carry over to existing scenarios.  To take advantage of a change like this one has to go into the Editor, delete the Formation in question and repurchase it.  That also requires hooking the units back into any Reinforcement and/or AI Plans, not to mention having to put them back into position on the map.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Works great in theory (and I've certainly wanted it!), however there's a lot of code complications with having a multi-purpose open-ended central game engine and everything is considered an "add on".  Simply put, the code was not designed for this and Charles has definitively said it's not feasible to put it in now.

Steve

Thanks for your answer Steve. This will be a great end of year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 11:23 PM, Battlefront.com said:

As soon as gamers are given something that is called "beta" they start thinking they are beta testers and wanting to have their 2 cents of input on everything.  Not just stuff we're trying to fix but stuff that isn't even broken.  This creates entitlement that we can't possibly live up to, which means we get slammed.

You are a wise man, Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 2:12 PM, Battlefront.com said:

Maybe it was because Charles didn't see how the code would apply to WW2, or it could be simply that he "fat fingered" a value while fixing the modern version.

You're a liar. Charles does not have fingers.

He has a direct neural interface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a chance we can get some changelogs to look for differences in the on-going SF2 AAR? I have seen quite a few posts commenting that infantry look stickier, which I'm excited for. I'd like to know a bit more if possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DougPhresh said:

Is there a chance we can get some changelogs to look for differences in the on-going SF2 AAR? I have seen quite a few posts commenting that infantry look stickier, which I'm excited for. I'd like to know a bit more if possible.

I'm excited to see the change log as well. Based on what Steve has said, I'm expecting it to be on the larger side. 

4 hours ago, sburke said:

Change logs for a product still being worked on.  Heh heh. Someone has been hitting the pipe a bit much. 😀

Get crackin! 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve:

Glad to see you and Die Alter Gang are still plugging away at CM. I am looking forward to the next patch so I can start all over again (been away awhile).

By the way... when was the last time you let Charles out of his jar?  **tsk, tsk**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DougPhresh said:

I’m itching to hear more about the patches. If we are still in the window where we can report bugs, it would be nice to know which ones the devs are aware of.

x 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since at last report the patch is nearly ready to go new bugs will not be addressed till a later patch.  Introducing new things now would require a whole new start to testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I preordered the big bundle CMSF.  I have all of the old modules.  I paid full price because CM is the only games I play.  I hope the CM is a profit making operation.  I enjoy all of their games and hope they make even more.  Thanks CM gang.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, lanceh55 said:

Today I preordered the big bundle CMSF.  I have all of the old modules.  I paid full price because CM is the only games I play.  I hope the CM is a profit making operation.  I enjoy all of their games and hope they make even more.  Thanks CM gang.  

+ 1    I did the same last week.  

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

×