Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Scene from Justified 

Dewey Crowder is handcuffed in a patrol car.

Dewey: this is it then Raylan? No final words? Put Dewey Crowder in his place?

Raylan: My advice? Stop talking about yourself in the third person. Makes you sound like a fool 

Dewey: Third person? What this guy (looking at officer in driver’s seat) man I don’t understand you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Speaking for myself only , if there is a CM3 in the works? Once that would be released it would render all my CM2 games(everything Ive accumulated) obsolete in my book, just like i never played CM1 again after CM2 release.I cant go backwards.Or perhaps CM3 is not in the works and CM2 is designed for the long haul.This is the dilema, If CM3 is released should they revisit the same timeline of the usual" Normandy setting 1st", i hope not. No matter what course they choose I'll be on board, what other option do I have? Nobody does what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

All I would like to see is CM Barbarossa... if CM3 is somehow in the works, what a great first module that would be!

I agree.  But the understanding I have is that BFC feel the late war is a better seller - more and bigger tanks, I presume...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, wadepm said:

I agree.  But the understanding I have is that BFC feel the late war is a better seller - more and bigger tanks, I presume...

It's so the entire OOB doesn't need redoing, almost all new 3D models, etc. Easier going forwards than back. That would be a full on base game.

Edited by benpark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Later war features more US forces, which is probably the largest market for the CM games.  Most of us on this board loved the early war period, Rommel in the desert, Barbarossa etc.  But, we here are only a hundred(?) or so - so a tiny % of the existing market for the CM games.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think just answered the question above.

Does it make sense to wait even longer for the entirety of the forces in 1941 to be modeled, etc- or to build off of what already has been done? There is a mammoth amount of work done on sub-modules alone. Again, that’s a base game. We are working off of 1944 here.

Edited by benpark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, benpark said:

That's me this go around for RT- the guy that made half of the giant CM master maps on your HD since CM:MG and the subsequent WWII titles. 

All hail @benpark :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, benpark said:

Does it make sense to wait even longer for the entirety of the forces in 1941 to be modeled, etc- or to build off of what already has been done? 

Imo let's wait...i think it would be a far sweeter ride to follow the war in the right direction and not jump back and forth wich is what we are doing on the eastern front now...1944 to 1945 to 1943...it does not feel 'great' 😎...

If CM3 indeed starts with Barbarossa i will have no problems waiting 6 months longer or however long it will take to get the earlier TOEs/OOBs in order...

After all...the avliable equipment in the earlier parts of the war where not all that plentyful as in 1944, 45 i belive...

A 1941 TOE/OOB may not need to be quite as big as the later ones...saving on dev.time...😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete shares my particular compulsion towards the big maps as well. It is always amazing to see what he does.

Everyone is invested in a fundamental way, it’s just not as visible when at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reuse of models incrementally is why a logical next step for the WW2 titles (if any) would be 1943 Tunisia - most of the kit is already there, and some of it (like the Valentine) are coming. No idea if we're getting the Italian medium tanks, mind you.

Similar logic applies to 1943 Eastern front, with both working backwards from there.

If we got to the early war on either front, then France 1940 and Poland would be a relatively small step again.

There are some fundamental logistical questions that I can't (and won't) really guess at the answers to - how many CM titles can realistically be supported? How many years can the engine roll on with patches and upgrades before it's more sensible to start again, in whole or in part? There's no clear answers there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/29/2019 at 6:52 PM, Warts 'n' all said:

There has been an "inkling" that the next BFC product will be CM Narnia. Well, someone had to say it.

No, no, no... CM SLOD -- Space Lobsters of Doom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'd love to see a unified, modular toolkit approach, where designers could simply create units by matching men with weapons, uniforms and equipment to create basically any force from 1930-1950. Want some Serbian partisans armed with a mix of old rifles, ex Yugoslavian army equipment and a mix of captured Italian and Romanian gear? Here you go! Fancy pitching them against an understrength company of second rate Slovakian gendarmerie armed with old German equipment and French armoured cars captured in 1940? Tada!

Edited by Sparky II
kant spel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sparky II said:

I'd love to see a unified, modular toolkit approach, where designers could simply create units by matching men with weapons, uniforms and equipment to create basically any force from 1930-1950. Want some Serbian partisans armed with a mix of old rifles, ex Yugoslavian army equipment and a mix of captured Italian and Romanian gear? Here you go! Fancy pitching them against an understrength company of second rate Slovakian gendarmerie armed with old German equipment and French armoured cars captured in 1940? Tada!

its an intresting idea...more options and flexibility could never hurt...or could it ?

one risk with giving TO MUCH freedom to the player/scenario designer might be that the realism level will go down...significantelly ! 

we might see some very wierd 'fantacy' forces in the scenarios/QBs...

as far as i know...REALISM is what the majority if CM players value very highely...

in this regard the way that BFC have opted to handle unit selection...by picking a formation and from that deselect what you do not want/need is a very clever move...

this usually keeps both the player and AI forces on a decent realism level compared to RL...

that is a good thing imo...

i would very, very, very much like to see more formations being released though...from various timeframes and areas....

that would be totally cool...i desert map for example could be used for many, many scenarios...not just CMSF 2 if we indeed had the required formations...

its a shame that BFC is such a small company...if only they had the resourses to design such formations they would sell like hotcake i'm sure 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's great to have the ability to create "realistic" battles easily.  But, it's surprising that CM2 doesn't offer an "anything goes" option where one can easily create any strange mix of units one wants - like one could with the CM1 game.  It doesn't stop anyone from playing as realistically as they want.  But why restrict the option?

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...