aka_tom_w

Yes, that would be perfect. Plus: full replay movie available at any time! Best regards, Thomm </font>

The think big comment is supposed to get you out of thinking in terms of CM1. I think most are approaching CM2 as simply CM1 with: 1:1 modelling higher polygon models higher res textures smaller terrain tiles better handling of LOS And maybe for many that is all they want. Plus horses or some other missing thing to be included. Steve is saying CM2 will be so much more than that. </font>

I am not sure if a review of this post will help us here or not? AND... ON that 1:1 Representation issue... [ February 12, 2005, 06:40 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

"'they' say nothing about three year olds because there is not a single phrase quite descriptive enough to shed light on the full impact that a person at the age of three can inflict on your psyche." YES to that I have a 3.5 yr son Hey Meach congradulations!!! (now about that all night sleep thing, my best advice is to find another dark quiet place to sleep so you can get a full nights rest so you can be effective on the "day shift", if both you and your wife don't get any sleep every night things start to go down hill fast. Don't get me wrong you aren't allowed to escape to the cave in the basement every night, but about once or twice a week I JUST had to have a ONE full night's peaceful sleep or I was a just useless all day ) for Me, 3 months was a big milestone, up to that point your daughter may only relate to your wife. After 3 months Dad seemed to be a "somebody" as well. Things GET real interesting between 9-12 months. AND if you are interested in reading about the process we found "What to Expect, The First Year" , (The comprehensive month-by-month guide that clearly explains everything parents need to know about the first year with a new baby.) REALLY it does just that and I found it a GREAT and invaluable resource. I don't know how to say this but keep a keen eye out for Postpartum Depression and DO EVERYTHING you can think of make your wive's life easier and make sure she feels especially loved and appreciated ALL the time, this should help you a great deal. Good Luck! Congradulations! -tom w [ February 12, 2005, 06:30 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Brilliant post I find it incredulous that you could be so correct, verbose and descriptive WITHOUT using the ever popular term "Paradigm Shift". BUT yes GREAT post.. you are right on! -tom w

I would bet the farm the current thinking for the game design parameters they are working on now DO NOT and WILL not ever include any option of ongoing, constant, never stopping REAL TIME play. If I was to guess I would say this would have to be a fundamental game design decision that would have had to have been made right at the start of the process and since it has been made clear that the turn structure is WEGO, I would say that eliminates any possibility of real time combat simulation. IMHO BUT I could be wrong. (good thing I don't own a farm) -tom w

There is some GOOD thinking for you: Green As Jade: "PBeM doesn't have to have the 'e' or even the 'M'. The heart of it is that I can do my turn at a different time to you. Since CMx2 is going to be revolutionary, there may be a revolution in just how that is acheieved... GaJ." if the new game is revolutionary some new way of doing this: " The heart of it is that I can do my turn at a different time to you." Should not be unexpected.... -tom w

Steves says: That sounds pretty certain to me.... -tom w [ February 11, 2005, 12:55 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

WOW For FREE they send .... "Select File to Send (Up to 1 GB): " UP TO 1 Gigabyte for FREE File transfer size SHOULD be no problem -tom w

I am concerned.... I would be MORE than HAPPY to "think big" But to be honest I am not sure what form of visionary mindbending paradigm shift you were expecting.... Please... Some folks here would actually like to step up to the challenge and try to help out, but some of us (thanks to all the noise from the bitching and moaning) are not all that sure what you are looking for, or in what direction this paradigm shift ("think big" new idea) should be heading. We know the game will have 1:1 representation. We know the game will be some form of military simulation We know the game will be WeGo OK? if you would like to set out a specific challenge or give us an idea which conceptual problems you are asking our opinion about I would be thrilled to help out. Bring on the Paradigm Shift! (but can you just hint us in the general direction so we can try to collectively help out, at least inbetween the noisy outbursts of "grogy-ness" ) AND.. You can sign me up for one of those fancy new cold fusion solar powered hybrid Enviro-Hover Cars you are working on (I want the first one off the line that you have for sale!) and thanks (GREAT parable, very nicely done!!!) -tom w [ February 11, 2005, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

The feature you are requesting.... "I would like to see is an in game browser something like game spy arcade that lets you find other internet games. " Might mean setting up some form of BFC Command Central gaming MASTER server to co-ordinate your search request with other online active gamers..... I suspect they may be thinking about something like this to facilitate co-play or Mulit-multi player for teams on each side, but it has been stated that won't be feature that is available in the first release of CMx2 (Game 1). They do however hope to have some form of co-play for CMx2 Game 2 and then that central server online game look up thing you are asking about maybe possible. -tom w

WOW That is ALOT of work and a GREAT interface!!! I hope CMx2 looks that GOOD!! hint hint hint!!! Its gorgeous! I like the LEDs that glow and the slightly beveled edges and the colours and lay out look GREAT!! its VERY appealing and it looks TRULY professional for a wargame interface IMO!! Nice work Thanks -tom w

This should have its OWN thread CM Wiki Check it out! I think this web page should be poste din TIPS and Tricks!!! This is amazing I have been Playing Combat Mission since the CMBO Beta Demo and I had NO idea of this resource: -tom w [ February 12, 2005, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

You may have missed it in the large and rowdy " 1:1 Representation" thread so I thought I would post the links here: Part 1 New Wargamer Paradigm AND Part II Wargamer new Paradigm There are interesting snips of what may be news or "wisdom" in these two articles. I found the second more interesting than the first: From Part II "One striking statistic that every wargame publisher eventually becomes aware of should it conduct a customer survey is that the largest portion of military wargame consumers play their games solitaire much of the time, if not exclusively. This characteristic begs several questions. Perhaps the most important among them is whether or not the games are played solitaire because of a lack of opponents, or because of something else? Unfortunately, I’m unaware of any empirical research that has occurred attempting to answer that question, but I can take a few anecdotal guesses. The most obvious, and perhaps most often assumed answer is lack of opponents, but it doesn’t hold up well under a certain type of scrutiny. With the preponderance of Play by (E)Mail (PBM or PBEM) tools available these days, even the most rural denizen of our hobby should be able to play wargames against an opponent. Further, there are many opponent services available through user groups and the like on the Internet. Granted, many people still don’t have computers or Internet access, but I think if they really wanted to find an opponent, they could by putting up a notice at a local hobby store. The answer lies elsewhere. The players themselves in various wargame forums have offered another solution to this mystery. Many say that they do not view the products as games at all, but rather tools with which they can further analyze and garner greater understanding of the historical situation. This act is done through reading and analysis of the rules and components, and play, if you will, of the game in a non-competitive way to examine how the situation unfolds on the map. Given that so many wargame customers play their games this way, it is critical that we as designers and publishers pay close attention to this issue." What do you think? comments? -tom w

Thanks Jim That article should be a must read for anyone and everyone posting to this thread. Its ALL about wargame design and the wargame player and designer relationship and the wargamer community. Thanks I found it very informative. But not at all related to Combat Mission in any specific or direct way. Maybe everyone should read it before they post any further here... -tom w "Groping for a New Paradigm, Part 2 Author: Jon Compton Article Type: Fifth Column Editorial Publication Date: 2/11/2005 Related Categories: Business and Industry, Reprinted Article Introduction The Wargamer is pleased to present the first of a three-part series written by Jon Compton, editor-in-chief of Fire & Movement Magazine. This article was originally published by Against the Odds Magazine in Volume 2, No. 2, and The Wargamer would like to thank them for sharing these with our readers. Part One of this series was published earlier. Groping for the New Paradigm, Part II: Through a Glass and Darkly One striking statistic that every wargame publisher eventually becomes aware of should it conduct a customer survey is that the largest portion of military wargame consumers play their games solitaire much of the time, if not exclusively. (WOW!! If this is really true Steve is right in what he has been telling us here!!) This characteristic begs several questions. Perhaps the most important among them is whether or not the games are played solitaire because of a lack of opponents, or because of something else? Unfortunately, I’m unaware of any empirical research that has occurred attempting to answer that question, but I can take a few anecdotal guesses. The most obvious, and perhaps most often assumed answer is lack of opponents, but it doesn’t hold up well under a certain type of scrutiny. With the preponderance of Play by (E)Mail (PBM or PBEM) tools available these days, even the most rural denizen of our hobby should be able to play wargames against an opponent. Further, there are many opponent services available through user groups and the like on the Internet. Granted, many people still don’t have computers or Internet access, but I think if they really wanted to find an opponent, they could by putting up a notice at a local hobby store. The answer lies elsewhere. The players themselves in various wargame forums have offered another solution to this mystery. Many say that they do not view the products as games at all, but rather tools with which they can further analyze and garner greater understanding of the historical situation. This act is done through reading and analysis of the rules and components, and play, if you will, of the game in a non-competitive way to examine how the situation unfolds on the map." [ February 11, 2005, 04:34 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

the original artwork of that GREAT image is online here: VERY nice -tom w

Slow down Jon.... please chill out like.... don't harass that hand that feeds the bones OK? I need more CMx2 bones or the withdrawl symptoms start to set in..... sorry but I am now hooked on bones and can't be happy without as least ONE good juicy one per day! please .... please don't cut me off... -tom w

You got that Right !! Don't bite the hand that is tossing the bones!!!! :mad: I think this thread needs a few more positive waves and a little less hyperbole. kick back and relax and let this thing grow and evolve ..... and lets hope Steve will keep the bones comin' our way... -tom w

OK point well taken... I think Steve has already labeled us the "vocal minority" I think maybe he had a few other choice words for us ... But I can't be sure -tom w

I think the horse has left the barn and the final decision to go with soldiers represented in a 1:1 graphic display has already been made.... So Redwolf, perhaps we can just let it go... Faith, Have a little faith baby, that bridge is going to be there! -tom w [ February 10, 2005, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

...and by that you mean (I hope) I do understand your point about the generic ones reminding the player the sim is also a game, and we would like to avoid that so somehow it would be nice to see a real graphic of a real tank with some additional way of letting the player know it is not confirmed and only a spotting "guess" or even an error. maybe just the label "unconfirmed" over it (or something) ? I agree with Kip completely on this issue. Good point... -tom w

Right ON!!! Lee Great Post! -tom w

WOW I guess this PBEM issue is sort of like touching a RAW nerve here! (ouch!) :eek: Steve tells us to relax because they simply don't know yet how the game will be coded or how big the PBEM files will be....and just to recap, some folks here are HIGHLY alarmed that PBEM could potentially be on the chopping block. :eek: :eek: I am sure if we sit back and think about this for a minute it will become clear that Steve is wise and correct when he tells us this: Just give us the PBEM with the large or huge file size and let us deal with "practicality" of the actual file size. I am sure everything will work out. I am glad Steve said this: That sounds good to me! I have faith they will make the BEST game possible..... -tom w [ February 10, 2005, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Hi Steve I think you will be surprised at how HUGE PBEM play is. It should rank a close second after Solo play vs the AI (which is like eating Chinese food, it sort of tastes good at first but ALWAYS leaves you hungery for more, and a better human oppoonent) Perhaps you could use the forum and the poll feature to take a poll of the critical importance of PBEM. Ask most folks here and they will tell you it JUST has to be there in CMx2... just ask us Maybe its time for a PBEM Rate the Importance Poll.... (or not ) Thanks -tom w [ February 10, 2005, 06:00 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

File compression? like zipit ? or stuffit? for PBEM size problem? Maybe there could be a form of file compression built into the game to minimize the PBEM file size? Maybe the PBEM format could change to minimize the number of file transfers? Even if the PBEM files are large I would guess most folks will find a way to deal with it (FTP or something) if e-mail attachments present a problem. Large size PBEM files should only impact folks with dial-up service, and then the impact would only be a lengthy time delay to upload or transfer. Any one with broadband and a half decent e-mail service should routinely swap multi-megabyte attachments with relative ease. Really large PBEM file sizes will make dial-up file transfer slower for sure but the big factor might be attachment file size limitations (hard limits) on services like hotmail or other free e-mail services, but then again that problem can be solved by paying for a more "premium" service even for dial-up players if they are prepared to wait for the file transfer over the phone. My point is please don't remove the PBEM option JUST because the file size is considered too large, you KNOW clever computer users will find ways to swap large PBEM files if they want to play bad enough, and you know how bad we want to play CMx2! -tom w