Jump to content
Wodin

What I'd like to see in CM3...

Recommended Posts

 I want pre orders or a special pack that grants you more time to play. A special bonus day each week where no one bothers you. Hey if you are gonna wish, wish big!

Share this post


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

willing to accept fewer vehicle types

That's an interesting option.  While it's lovely to have so many vehicular options, the fact is that it is very rare to see more than a very few vehicles used repeatedly in scenarios and campaigns.  Am sure there are some vehicles that have never been used at all (or maybe once) in all these years.  No point in offering so many choices when designers only pick vehicles from the same list of a dozen or so (per title).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Erwin said:

No point in offering so many choices when designers only pick vehicles from the same list of a dozen or so (per title).

Wars have been started for less.

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know people would get upset about less choice.  But, the fact is, having played hundreds of scenarios from all the titles, one sees only the same 6-10 vehicles per each title used all the time and some vehicles am sure have never been used (or maybe once in 7 years).  So, what's the point of all that extra work by BF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Erwin said:

Yeah, I know people would get upset about less choice.  But, the fact is, having played hundreds of scenarios from all the titles, one sees only the same 6-10 vehicles per each title used all the time and some vehicles am sure have never been used (or maybe once in 7 years).  So, what's the point of all that extra work by BF?

 

Blame the Scenario designers, you are correct as to how seldom some units are used.

But blame yourself also, I am not afraid to make my own set ups with those units that you claim are never used.

So I have enjoyed them included in the game, where as I am so sick of Tiger tanks that I could not play with one for years and still be happy.

 

But in general, don't expect someone else to create and meet your needs, CM gives you the ability to set up and create what you want . (That's the best part about the game, So removing options as to units would be a poor decision in my book.)

 

But hey, I would still be playing CMX1 because of having so many units to choose from, but  game play in CMX2 was so much more realistic and  graphics that were not outdated made me accept the fact I am limited as to time periods I can now only play in. (So CM3 would have to be a massive improvement in play before I would accept the fact I was limited even more by fewer units to being able to create different match ups with.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let alone not everyone plays just scenarios. Some people like QBs. Some people play QB multiplayer. Etc. I personally love all the weird s*** most people ignore. I want more, not less. Then again, Erwin is a master of contradicting himself so there's that. AS I said the LAST time he brought this up, he'd be the first one b*tching the second something was missing. And I'd be right there pissed off, beside him...difference is I wouldn't have been asking for BF to not do stuff before hand.

 

Mord.

Share this post


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

Yeah, I know people would get upset about less choice.  But, the fact is, having played hundreds of scenarios from all the titles, one sees only the same 6-10 vehicles per each title used all the time and some vehicles am sure have never been used (or maybe once in 7 years).  So, what's the point of all that extra work by BF?

It's also worth noting you can swap stuff out in the editor. so if you don't want Tigers/M1s/T34s then swap em out for something else. Although it might mean the scenario is err 'unbalanced'.

FWI I tend to create scenarios that have a historical foundation so that does mean the units involved will be 'samey' i.e. you'll get PzIVs, PzV, StuGs, T34s, JSIIs if its 1944 timeframe and PAK, lots of PAK. I'm not a great fan of infantry only stuff - not my bag really. But I guess it is why you need a broad range of designers who all have their own feti...err, interests and create stuff that reflects them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I get beat up in a scenario.  I sometimes then unbalance on purpose and just beat the daylights out of the other side.  It feels cheap but somewhat satisfying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slysniper said:

Blame the Scenario designers, you are correct as to how seldom some units are used.

But blame yourself also, I am not afraid to make my own set ups with those units that you claim are never used.

Awesome post - I'm all out of up votes or I'd be just doing that.

I'll just reiterate what @Mord brought up - Quick Battles. It is so easy to go get whatever vehicle you want and have fun. You don't even *have* to do the work that @slysniper and @George MC remind you that you can do because - Quick Battles.

Come on guys this is a CM3 wish list thread. So far only about 10% of it is even remotely interesting. You guys can do better - I think :D

Share this post


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

It's also worth noting you can swap stuff out in the editor. so if you don't want Tigers/M1s/T34s then swap em out for something else. Although it might mean the scenario is err 'unbalanced'.

FWI I tend to create scenarios that have a historical foundation so that does mean the units involved will be 'samey' i.e. you'll get PzIVs, PzV, StuGs, T34s, JSIIs if its 1944 timeframe and PAK, lots of PAK. I'm not a great fan of infantry only stuff - not my bag really. But I guess it is why you need a broad range of designers who all have their own feti...err, interests and create stuff that reflects them.

Yet somehow your scenarios also allow for some really fun infantry based action. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IanL said:

Come on guys this is a CM3 wish list thread. So far only about 10% of it is even remotely interesting. You guys can do better - I think :D

Here are my top 3 choices for CM3:

1. The ability to place terrain tiles, trees, buildings, roads all in 3D view. I would like to build the entire map, including laying out AI plans in 3D.

2. The ability to create an AI plan for a map or scenario by saving a play through. For example, I create a scenario and layout the AI plans for the defence but no plans for the attacker. I send out the scenario to several players who try their best to defeat the defenders. Each of those playthroughs is saved and imported into the scenario as an attack AI plan. This will also allow players to swap AI plans with other players. A sort of single player, H2H mode if you will.

3. More of everything EXCEPT graphics. My kids are growing up in the generation with the best graphics processing available and some of the most visually stunning games ever made. Guess what they love to play the most? Minecraft. Anyone take a look at the graphics on Minecraft recently? It is the freedom to do what they want in the game that is appealing and not the graphics that keep them playing. I want a true sandbox mode where I the freedom to put any unit from any title up against each other. I want to see more tanks, more infantry, more experimental equipment that almost certainly never saw any action, airplanes, helicopters, larger maps, brigades vs brigades, you name it, bring it on! Keep the mod abilities in the game so those of you who do want to see every rivet and screw in every gun, the inside of every tank, right down to the grease zerts, can have the ability to mod to your hearts content. Just please dont give us 6 amazingly rendered vehicle models, 3 for each side, and then call that a game. If the graphics don't get any better than what we have now, but we have more freedom and more choice, that is a win for me.

Edited by Heirloom_Tomato
Completed my thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Heirloom_Tomato said:

Here are my top 3 choices for CM3:

1. The ability to place terrain tiles, trees, buildings, roads all in 3D view. I would like to build the entire map, including laying out AI plans in 3D.

2. The ability to create an AI plan for a map or scenario by saving a play through. For example, I create a scenario and layout the AI plans for the defence but no plans for the attacker. I send out the scenario to several players who try their best to defeat the defenders. Each of those playthroughs is saved and imported into the scenario as an attack AI plan. This will also allow players to swap AI plans with other players. A sort of single player, H2H mode if you will.

3. More of everything EXCEPT graphics. My kids are growing up in the generation with the best graphics processing available and some of the most visually stunning games ever made. Guess what they love to play the most? Minecraft. Anyone take a look at the graphics on Minecraft recently? It is the freedom to do what they want in the game that is appealing and not the graphics that keep them playing. I want a true sandbox mode where I the freedom to put any unit from any title up against each other. I want to see more tanks, more infantry, more experimental equipment that almost certainly never saw any action, airplanes, helicopters, larger maps, brigades vs brigades, you name it, bring it on! Keep the mod abilities in the game so those of you who do want to see every rivet and screw in every gun, the inside of every tank, right down to the grease zerts, can have the ability to mod to your hearts content. Just please dont give us 6 amazingly rendered vehicle models, 3 for each side, and then call that a game. If the graphics don't get any better than what we have now, but we have more freedom and more choice, that is a win for me.

I like your thinking.

I agree with you on all three areas. ( I construct 3d models for a living and that is exactly how you can improve the map making ability for the game) what could be a easy start to that is providing the ability to split screen, meaning two views, one for the 3d view and one for their present 2d systems. Then they could take their time getting abilities to do thing directly in the 3d environment.

I love your concept to programming battle plans for item 2. I think AI scripting is very unnatural in its present forms. But a system of memory that repeats moves of what a person shows for each unit would be a interesting way of approaching it. (still would need trigger overrides and such) but I would love to just show how I want the units to move and where to exactly locate and have the machine try to carry out the plan.

Freedom to create is always on the top of my list also. (any restrictions is always a negative in my book)

So I don't even like it when they try to limit it to just the historical units present at only certain times (that's great when you want a historical set up but why not allow for a button option where that can be removed. basically any unit available for any time or any army). It would allow crazy stuff but also some interesting things that are historical also.Like use of captured equipment .

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well a new one on the top of my list is.

Sleeping troops.

I was playing some different night scenarios at one point and I was trying to infiltrate enemy lines with elite units that were unknown to the enemy.

It dawned on me how unrealistic it was, every enemy unit on the alert , all watching and waiting to ambush my men.

Where as, this is the farthest from the truth.. If no enemy are known to be in a area, most men are in a state of sleep. listening post are set, a percentage of men are on watch and the rest are either trying to get needed task done or needed rest. (And this is not just at night, even in the day, during down times, commanders are trying to make sure their men are getting rest.)

 

So it crossed my mind, the designer should have a feature to put a certain percentage of men to sleep at the start of the battle, providing only a small portion of each squad to be active.

This is the state they remain in til enemy gun fire is heard or friendly troops spot enemy units or things along these lines. Then they awake depending on how close they are to the event and then a little time of not full ability as they get their act together to be able to fight and figure out what is going on.

 

Anyway, as someone that has done this for real, I know for a fact its only because of this that we were able to do such feats. Literally were able to get right inside enemy camps.

I knew of one sniper team which actually waited in some scrubs for hours near a commanders tent for them to go to sleep and snuck in and obtained planning documents right of the tables in there and then managed to get out of there in time before it was noticed, which was at about 4:00am, then it was like a ant bed. that has been stomped on.

They had every troop on that mountain side patrolling and searching, their commander was pissed and he was willing to risk his men to try and catch  who did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slysniper said:

So it crossed my mind, the designer should have a feature to put a certain percentage of men to sleep at the start of the battle, providing only a small portion of each squad to be active.

This is the state they remain in til enemy gun fire is heard or friendly troops spot enemy units or things along these lines. Then they awake depending on how close they are to the event and then a little time of not full ability as they get their act together to be able to fight and figure out what is going on.

That, plus flares, and we would have a great night battles sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mord said:

the LAST time he brought this up, he'd be the first one b*tching the second something was missing. And I'd be right there pissed off, beside him...difference is I wouldn't have been asking for BF to not do stuff before hand.

Normally I would say that is true.  The more the merrier, I say. 

But, this thread is/was about "what would you like to see" and as soon as someone brings up their own desires, someone else dumps on them about the fact that hard choices have to be made by BF re what to spend time and money on due to imitations of resources.  So, let's be consistent and stop personal attacks which reveal more about the person posting than anything else.

The fact is that if someone wants "A", then "B" may get cut.  All I am doing is pointing out that there are many vehicles that are hardly ever or never used.  So, there is a potential waste of resources that perhaps could be better spent.  In an ideal world with unlimited resources, yes the more choice the better.  But we need to be realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not personally attacking you, just pointing out a fact. We've been interacting for at least 12 years and I know your personality fairly well at this point. You will say one thing and then contradict yourself down the road. That's all. Like I said, once they did what you ask you'd be complaining about it six months later.

You can have your ideas, that's fine, but I am not gonna not respond to ideas that I feel are detrimental to my enjoyment of the games. Vehicles and equipment are a big part of why I love CM, especially seeing that they are one of the few game titles that doesn't hold back. BF gives us stuff that have rarely been seen. But once again you assume the way you play is the only way people play therefore ALL these other vehicles/units aren't being used. I've seen many times where you have pointed out that the forum doesn't necessarily represent the majority of CM players yet now, during this debate, somehow your view does. See, contradiction.

But it is what it is. LOL. You drive me crazy sometimes, but I don't hate you or anything. So, unless I outright call you names don't take my comments personally.

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two player campaigns!

I just don't get why (comparatively) the easiest thing to implement and the change that would bring maximum joy to this game for most of the more serious players, still isn't a feature.

Granted with the size of CAM files, Head to head campaigns would not be best served up as huge packages of lengthy sequences of scenarios. But a campaign with a mere 4 or 5 scenarios would still be engrossing progress from the present play limitations. Come on BF!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, aus3620 said:

CMx3 - Be inspired by Graviteam Tank Warfare - Mius Front, but add WEGO capability. 

That has to be the least helpful comment so far. You are essentially saying "make this game like those other games but with one other thing". Go to those other game forums and advocate for a WEGO feature.

Or talk about what specific features you think would be a good fit in CM.

Share this post


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

Go to those other game forums and advocate for a WEGO feature.

Quite! 😏 And it's not just WEGO that CM gets right. If Gravitem hit the spot (on balance) more than CM, I wouldn't be playing CM!

Share this post


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

That has to be the least helpful comment so far. You are essentially saying "make this game like those other games but with one other thing". Go to those other game forums and advocate for a WEGO feature.

Or talk about what specific features you think would be a good fit in CM.

Heh for those of us completely uninterested in graviteam, making it more like that is a recipe for not having a game to play. Probably hold likewise for those who play graviteam and aren’t interested in CM. Let each company play to its strength. A hybrid would more likely fail at both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Larger Maps - say at least 6km x 10km or larger even though I know most computer systems cant handle that - some can like mine.  Needed for longer range engagements, recon, and modern weapons.  I prefer battalion level scenarios though I know that's not the express purpose of the game.

2. Modern Warfare - Upgrade of CMBS [or] Integration of CMSF2 with Russians, upgraded equipment (with APS), and Euro Terrain.  Or a new CM modern warfare game altogether on Euro/Asian terrain.  What about Chinese?

3. More dynamic fire and smoke graphics for burning vehicles, buildings, and terrain.

4. Fuel levels and refueling.

5. Troops riding on armored vehicles in Modern warfare.

6. Greater ability to extend battles by importing previous battle outcome into a new battle on the same map.

Great Game!  Thanks BF.

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...