Brit Module update

[Tuomio]

- doesn't make a difference what happens with TOW 2. TOW is made by a Russian company that sells through the BFT website, and is entirely independent of what goes on in the CM series.

Reason for combined marketing channel is to have scheduled releases for maximum exposure/profit. I would expect atleast 1 month between 2 important releases.

Longer we have to wait for british troops, the better it gets. 1 month will mean hordes of additional features and bugfixes.

Note for BFC: learn from the Marines release, polish the included campaing and have some sort of tutorial intro-campaing.

[Yair Iny]

Given that the module was supposed to be out months ago, and the fact that Steve felt a need to post an explanation for the delay (i.e. the OP of this thread), I doubt the Brit module is being delayed for any reason other than that it's not ready yet...

[Battlefront.com]

I can't think of any time when we've purposefully held up the release of a product for any significant time because of market timing. For us market timing doesn't matter much since we're niche and not competing with anybody else for shelf space. We also don't care if customers buy our games the day they come out of 3 months later. All we care about is them buying it at some point That's the beauty of not having to deal with retail.

In short, if the British Module were ready to go on Friday we might have delayed one or the other so we didn't have two products in the same spotlight on the same day. But Brit Module isn't ready to be released yet because we're still working on the campaign and scenarios. The game itself is basically done, less the usual stuff we are always tweaking/fixing on an ongoing basis.

Steve

[-Eddie-]

The game itself is basically done, less the usual stuff we are always tweaking/fixing on an ongoing basis.

Steve

So err, how much more of the campaign and skirmishes are left to finish?

[Meach]

Dunno why but I get a hunch we may see the module released sometime around May 15th. Just a gut feeling.

[Yair Iny]

Surely not, as that would make it a Friday. E-e-e-veryone knows that BFC never release anything on Friday, at least the releases always slip into the weekend I call it May 16th then!

[Nicdain]

I may be wrong (and I hope so ) but usually BFC releases follow pre-order openings at least a month later. And at present, no pre-order has been announced...

So I think Brit module won't be out before the beginning of June.

[Sivodsi]

I may be wrong (and I hope so ) but usually BFC releases follow pre-order openings at least a month later. And at present, no pre-order has been announced...

So I think Brit module won't be out before the beginning of June.

IIRC there was no pre-order for the Marines, so we shouldn't expect there to be for the Brits.

So, come on, May! May! May! (everybody altogether now) May! May! May!

(repeat ad nauseam until Brits module released).

[Field Marshal Blücher]

IIRC there was no pre-order for the Marines, so we shouldn't expect there to be for the Brits.

So, come on, May! May! May! (everybody altogether now) May! May! May!

(repeat ad nauseam until Brits module released).

There was a huge pre-order for the Marines. Many became upset with the delayed release of Marines because they pre-ordered it so long before it came out.

[Sivodsi]

There was a huge pre-order for the Marines. Many became upset with the delayed release of Marines because they pre-ordered it so long before it came out.

doh!

Well, that's why we use 'IIRC'

OK, next question: will there be pre-order for the whingeing poms module?

[Battlefront.com]

One of the things that's really hard to gauge is how scenario creation and testing is going. For a long, long time it just seems like there's no end in sight. Then, as if out of the blue, it's done. Sure, sure, sure... you can say x number of scenarios are finished out of y total, but until people start playing them and the authors doing the usual revisions, you really can't estimate how long it will take to complete. Now, if I had the luxury of 5 full time paid staff members cranking on the play testing (like I once had, prior to Battlefront), then I could give you a better estimate With the fantastic volunteer crew we have, we have to accept that they're not going to be putting in regular 40 hours a week and then 80 hours a week when The Man says "we ship or you're all fired" by such and such a date. Ah... how I don't miss those days of corporate game testing!

Steve

[Scipio]

If so much time is spend on scenario design, then I wonder why there are so few really good scenarios, and some really poor.

It was often mentioned that the Syrian performance is very bad. Steve has recommented to play the Syrians in a completly different way than the US troops. While I agree to this, I also notice that there is not a single tutorial to teach the Syrian style of combat, or even a scenario that is recommented to be played as Red side only, or optimized for the Syrians.

Another weak point are scenario briefings. CM2 has in theory a good and very complex system of victory conditions, but the briefings leaves you often with only a vague idea of the goal. The after action screen makes it even worse, since it gives only very few informations about the reasons for the achieved result. Both is to some degree also a result of the scenario design. IIRC, Steve also agreed to this before.

[Thomm]

Scipio,

Do you refer to the original scenarios, or to the ones from the Marines module? The latter ones should be quite ok, especially the ones from the campaign.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Meach]

BFC should give Mishga a job doing RED orientated scenario's. She can do a decent job of the presentation and front end package. The actual shooting type bit is not to bad either but I am biased lol

[MikeyD]

then I wonder why there are so few really good scenarios, and some really poor.

I think you're going to be really pleasantly surprised with the Brit module. There's nothing like having a few years of practice to improve the product.

About playing Syrian differently than the U.S., the game is the tutorial. Where else can you strategize, plan and execute different tactics with different force mixes? Adding a paragraph to the manual on 'how Syrians fight' seems a bit reduntant since access to Google, Wikipedia, etc. is a mouse click away. Besides, the Syrians haven't really gone toe-to-toe with anyone since 1982 (though they did deploy beside the U.S. for the Kuwait war). I doubt even they know how they'd fight under a CMSF scenario.

[Peter Panzer]

Something of a quick aside here...

Scipio:

Do you have plans to update your Unit Icon and Small Arms Icon mods to reflect the new hardware in the UK Module?

I certainly hope so. The current versions really bring the interface to life and are quite skillfully executed. Thanks for sharing your work!

BFC:

Speaking of icons, don't forget to add a unique portrait icon for REDFOR AFV crews in v.1.2. It seems it was accidentally left out of the Marines Module when the BLUFOR received their AFV crew portraits.

[SlapHappy]

If so much time is spend on scenario design, then I wonder why there are so few really good scenarios, and some really poor.

It was often mentioned that the Syrian performance is very bad. Steve has recommented to play the Syrians in a completly different way than the US troops. While I agree to this, I also notice that there is not a single tutorial to teach the Syrian style of combat, or even a scenario that is recommented to be played as Red side only, or optimized for the Syrians.

Another weak point are scenario briefings. CM2 has in theory a good and very complex system of victory conditions, but the briefings leaves you often with only a vague idea of the goal. The after action screen makes it even worse, since it gives only very few informations about the reasons for the achieved result. Both is to some degree also a result of the scenario design. IIRC, Steve also agreed to this before.

The way I see it a couple of things have to happen to make RED a viable force. Either the scenario designer has to artificially pump up either troop quality or quantity (quality seems to be the more effective tack) or they have to fairly severely hamstring the BLUE force in some manner.

Making extremely tight BLUE victory requirements is another way to "harden" the game experience a bit. This can have the negative effect of making what appears to be a blue romp into a frustrating "RED tactical victory".

Right now I don't see any command triggers which can be implemented to drive RED behavior when played by AI opponent. For instance, I had three groupings of RED combatants who just happened to be facing the wrong way in buildings as a Marine AAV drove by each of their positions. It would have been a fairly easy ambush situation for them if they had been able to acquire LOS and reacted accordingly. Instead they stood by blissfully unaware of what was going on just a few feet away from them.

If unit squads could have "roamers" who would occasionally reposition in such a situation to check out other LOS positions, he might have spotted the AAV and called the other guys over "Look Mohammed, a juicy target coming up the road, just behind us!" Since our CMSF soldiers are effectively "deaf" this seems to be the only probable means of enemy AI to maintain some level of battlefield awareness.

CMSF does a good job of simulating a realistic battlefield simulation on a fairly large scale. Where it is not always so strong is realistically depicting the actual unit-level contact points between enemy forces, especially in short-range engagements. Hopefully this will improve as new TACAI behaviors are added to the game. As an example, the "bugout" feature has added tremendously to the believability of the soldiers in firefight situations.

[Scipio]

Scipio,

Do you refer to the original scenarios, or to the ones from the Marines module? The latter ones should be quite ok, especially the ones from the campaign.

Best regards,

Thomm

Yes, the scenarios in the marines modul are better, but with oddities. 'Just around the bend', for example. The conscript and green Syrian troops are positioned in some trenches in the open. No chance to change positions or do something important at all, while they already getting routed by fire that's 200m away. Even if this is realistic, there are no options for the red player.

Something of a quick aside here...

Scipio:

Do you have plans to update your Unit Icon and Small Arms Icon mods to reflect the new hardware in the UK Module?

Yes, I have such plans.

[Scipio]

The way I see it a couple of things have to happen to make RED a viable force. Either the scenario designer has to artificially pump up either troop quality or quantity (quality seems to be the more effective tack) or they have to fairly severely hamstring the BLUE force in some manner.

Making extremely tight BLUE victory requirements is another way to "harden" the game experience a bit. This can have the negative effect of making what appears to be a blue romp into a frustrating "RED tactical victory".

I agree to this. To adjust victory conditions is the only way to solve the problems of the in many ways unbalanced forces as we have them in CMSF. But than again we get easly caught in the double-trap of vague briefing and the much to undetailed after-action screen, especially in case of a tight result.

[MarkEzra]

Yes, the scenarios in the marines modul are better, but with oddities. 'Just around the bend', for example. The conscript and green Syrian troops are positioned in some trenches in the open. No chance to change positions or do something important at all, while they already getting routed by fire that's 200m away. Even if this is realistic, there are no options for the red player.

If by "No Chance to change positions" you mean during setup, you are in error. I just checked the red setup and the entire area is painted red, not just the trenches. Also there are several trench line to confuse the Blue player. The small rise that divides the red setup area from "no mans land" is very helpful to the Red player's ability to strike first and generally defeat in detail the blue forces. I do appreciate your notice that the basic setup is not UN-realistic but difficult. You should try it from the Blue side...This scen generally gives those guys fits.

I happen to play Red force almost exclusively in PBEM. So I like rooting for the underdog.

[Lethaface]

We at least have PaperTiger with his Red on Red campaign

However, I would love to see a Red vs Blue campaign. Had the idea a couple of times but it takes a lot of time to create even one scenario, letalone a campaign. Unfortunately, I dont have that time.

There are indeed not so many scenarios interesting to play from the Red side, unfortunately. Well I guess most players just like to play as Blue.

[theFightingSeabee]

I'm one of those Blue guys. The red vs red are fun too, but I don't generally go near red vs blue. It's too emotionally wierd for me I guess, although it is a great idea if you really want to be a better blue player. To understand how to win as red can mean understanding how to win as blue.

Scipio,

Thank the Lord that you're going to do the weapons icons mods for CMBF. Your mods should, imo, be incorporated into the the final release.

[Scipio]

I think you're going to be really pleasantly surprised with the Brit module. There's nothing like having a few years of practice to improve the product.

About playing Syrian differently than the U.S., the game is the tutorial. Where else can you strategize, plan and execute different tactics with different force mixes? Adding a paragraph to the manual on 'how Syrians fight' seems a bit reduntant since access to Google, Wikipedia, etc. is a mouse click away. Besides, the Syrians haven't really gone toe-to-toe with anyone since 1982 (though they did deploy beside the U.S. for the Kuwait war). I doubt even they know how they'd fight under a CMSF scenario.

You're speaking about Syrian tactics in reality, but they are obviously not the best way to win against Blue forces .

[Lethaface]

Hide, shoot & pray is my tactic for the RED forces

By the way; I can remember very well how Scipio totally owned me as RED when playing a remake of an original battle from CMx1, forgot the name. It had a starting line something with 'As the red lines crumble'... OUCH...

[flamingknives]

Sounds like "Chance Encounter".

One of the demo missions for CM:BO and a good laugh.