Hunter
-
Posts
593 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Hunter
-
-
Very sorry to hear about this. And it's a shame it took such a personal toll on Hunter. Thanks for letting me into the beta-test team all those months ago...it was frustrating, but you know, there were some very exciting moments in there when it felt close to prime time.
Just one technical question though...is there any place in the source code where the API for transferring between CMBB and CMC (or CMC2) is specified? Maybe in a code comment or some sort of text file that was received from Charles?
I don't really have the patience to work on a UI right now (especially not in a language I am unfamiliar with), but I am sorely tempted to see if anything can be done via simple XML transfers. That way, you could almost use a simple spreadsheet to drive a linked set of battles.
Yes, the interface is specified in a text file and is implemented in the code in a fairly specific place. XML is a nice idea, but ultimately it is a very specific text file format that must be written to CMBB. Any misalignment of parameters (an extra byte or something) will muck it up.
Check out "Starting a CM Battle Mappings.doc" for an overview.
-
They Said It Couldn't Be Done
They said it couldn't be done.
They laughed when I said I would do it.
They said that it couldn't be done.
I rolled up my sleeves and went to it.
I struggled, I strove, I strained.
I fought at it day and night.
They said that it couldn't be done.
They were right.
LOL! That sounds about right, yes :-)
-
Indeed. There is no guarantee that just because it is open source, there is a team to work on it. It will require considerable effort, whatever approach is taken. There are several approaches that may be deemed viable.
Good luck to anyone who does take it on.
-
I regret that I have had to cancel the development of Combat Mission Campaigns, at least in its present form, and possibly in any form.
What went wrong
CMC was a major undertaking, and I certainly underestimated how long it would take to develop. I was probably way too ambitious. Just building an interface to CMBB was one thing, and a tricky one at that, given that CMBB had not originally been designed with that end in mind. But as well as that there was an engine that enabled 'relative spotting' for each commander, given the reports that he would have access to from his subordinates, including communication delays and so on. I had never seen this done before in a comprehensive way, for any game or simulation, and it caused some considerable complexity.
CMC was designed to be a 'grognard's dream', with every aspect of WWII warfare included at some level. It has a very sophisticated supply model, air forces, weather and 9 different ground conditions with associated (2D!) graphics, artillery support, tactical reserves, entrenchment, etc, etc. There is a ridiculously large code base handling everything from medals to soldier promotions to strategic AI.
The problem is that it took too long to develop, and the core engine proved unstable and difficult to fix. I find myself in the position this New Year of having something that is arguably 99% done, and yet we cannot nail the key bugs which prevent release (and no one wants to release something that is deficient). Just like the same time last year. And the year before that.
There have been some talented people dedicate work to the project, only to leave for a variety of reasons throughout (better career, family tragedy, etc). Each time this happens, on such a small team, it causes disruption and complication in new people coming up to speed. It generally takes some months for them to be at peak productivity.
Unlike most major commercial titles, but similar to CMBB, this was developed on a 'shoestring', without the support of a major backer. That means that it cost me personally the bulk of my life savings and my earnings over the last few years. I have run out of passion for working on it, and money to fund it. Keeping one or several programmers busy simply from the funds I personally earn in the computer industry has been possible, but increasingly painful.
It has been clear for some time that any proceeds from the sale of the game would not meet the expenditure. Nevertheless, I persisted with it because I did not wish to see the effort go to waste, I wanted to provide something entertaining, and I am very, very stubborn.
Work ceased over a month ago now. I already feel better, like the man who stops hitting his head against a wall. Apologies for not releasing news of this earlier, but there are some processes.
Apologies and Thanks
I lend my apologies to the fans who wished to see the kind of campaign system that CMC was intended to provide.
Thanks to the beta testers who helped out, creating maps, campaigns, providing feedback, testing buggy software, etc.
An even greater apology to those who volunteered time and effort to help with manual development or graphics. Especially so, Marco Bergman who personally created THOUSANDS of graphical images covering units, vehicles, interface, etc. I feel badly for someone who has worked so hard voluntarily and does not even see the title released. And there were others.
Battlefront, through Martin and Charles, have put a lot of effort into this game as well, while pushing forward with their other titles.
The Future
As promised, we have made the source code and other assets available for the community. Too much work, sweat and blood was invested by too many people to let it simply vanish. And who knows, maybe there are skilled individuals out there who have the time and energy to take what we have and lead it to a conclusion.
The source code and other files have been uploaded and are available as an open source project from sourceforge.net here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cmcampaigns
If you are interested to become part of the project, please feel free to join the sourceforge.net project.
There are two important things to note:
- the files are released AS IS. There is a set of documents released and downloadable from sourceforge. That is all the documentation you're going to get. There will be no further support for this project from us.
- all files are released under the GNU GPL Copyleft license. This means that not only are they open source, any derivates based on them have to be open source, too, and may not be commercially exploited. We strongly suggest that you read the GNU GPL 3.0 license text (it's available under the "Documentation" tab on the sourceforge project) to avoid any nasty misunderstandings about this in the future.
If I had ever released the game, I would certainly have dedicated it to those who fell in that terrible conflict, whose suffering puts all our troubles in perspective.
Cheers,
-
All the maps must be made by hand (the hand of the scenario designer).
It is a lot of work, and there is a tendency to re-use strategic maps for different campaigns because of it.
-
I have been working on a new scenario with elements of the 1st Liebstandarte defending the Donets river SE of Kharkov against elements of the 3rd Tank Army.
There is a huge area to defend, much of it by a single Aukflarung battalion.
-
Percentage complete? Been at 99% for the last yearOriginally posted by Conte Malaspina:Hunter!
Long time no see! Thanks for the input. Great to see some activity on this project. Really looking forward to it.
My expectations are to see something maybe just a little more complex and graphically pleasing than RoBo's quick battle generator, which has been hovering over at the CMBB forum for some time now, and which really gave a kick (its limitations being repetitiveness of battles generated).
I won't ask about a release date of course, but any indication in terms of percentage of completion?
Thanks
enrico
-
Well...er, sorry, that would be nice (if long!) but it really doesn't work.Originally posted by Friant:Hi all,
I would like to have a Stategic Command 2 with fighting the battles at CM level.
Thats it.
Each single battle in SC2 would translate into a very large CMC campaign, that would take perhaps days or months to play out at the CMBB level.
CMC sits in between SC2 and CMBB, and you can play out campaigns over hours, days and even weeks.
I know the idea of a dynamic campaign is really cool too. Unfortunately, that is not what CMC allows, at least initially. You could MANUALLY make several campaigns and use the OOB that survived from one to start another, but it doesn't auto-generate campaigns or anything even remotely like it.
-
-
...and just to be clear, CMC will run on Vista. But I don't see CMBB being changed to suit it (if there are indeed problems in running it, although I noted some posts saying it already runs on Vista).
-
The grid in CMC is squares, and there are some slightly odd results with diagonal squares. On the whole, it works out. The sighting features mean at least you can see where you will be seen from. This takes into account terrain, your movement, time of day and so on.
High ground is generally helpful for spotting.
Air recon doesn't happen at the moment, but it is a good idea for later.
-
Campaigns are human designed. Actually, there is a lot of work in designing a campaign. No way we are anywhere near a randomly generated campaign.Originally posted by lparkh:Are campaigns "dynamic" or human designed?
Once in a campaign, obviously the AI can decide to do different things from time to time. That's not what you meant I am sure.
-
Agree 100% with Seamonkey. The AI should never be limited so we can beat it. If it could beat me without any advantages (i.e. the same points as a human opponent), then I could always give myself an advantage in points! I don't expect that any time soon though.
Having said that SC2 has remarkably good AI. A fantastic effort.
Hunter
-
Link works for me. The site should be changed post-haste for everyones convenience (as it is jolly hard to find right now using the instructions on the website).
Cheers
-
Yes, it is.Originally posted by Fenris:Cheers Hunter.
-
Something, hmmmm...
We are working on resolving a few bugs. We have a neat new orders template for explaining scenarios to the player. We fixed some bugs in the auto-resolve system that were causing bad results (small forces beating big forces, that sort of bad result!). We have fixed a bug with the map where changes in one battle were not being reflected in the next battle on the same map.
We have move bugs, we are working on them. The beta team is playing through and finding them for us. Sorry about all the delays. At the very least, as frustrating for me as you
Hunter
-
Yes, any decent campaign system will throw up 'unbalanced' battles. It is up to you to make the most of these; either lose as little as possible in the attack, or kill as much as possible on the defence, and seek to keep them 'unbalanced' in your favour. If the result is obvious or immaterial, you can autocalculate it.
Often the climax of the campaign will hinge on 1 or 2 'balanced' battles.
-
Its a default name that shouldnt be seen too often. The 3 ratings are his Leadership ability, Organisational Ability and Aggressiveness.Originally posted by Ted:Thanks for the update in the blog Moon.
I know a lot of people looking forward to the CMC release
None the description of the screen shots pointed out what was the story about poor Efrietor the Unknown Soldier?
He has been dependable, capable and despicable (despicable?). He’s been average, confused and disorganized. But always cautious.
Are these unit conditions?
-
Guys,
We are having some problems getting to the end, but it isn't all bad news.
We do have all the tanks and vehicles modelled now, every single one.
The beta testers are working on beta 6, and bugs from that are being attended to.
I wouldn't think anything much more will be done this calendar year, as far as public announcements and so on.
Sorry, sometimes things take longer than planned.
Hunter
-
Casualties and Flags both count towards victory. There is a balance depending on how much the scenario creator has made the flags worth. IF they are worth a lot, then holding them may be the most important thing in the scenario. If they are worth little, then maneuvering or other operations to destroy enemy forces may be much more important.
-
As per Jason C's campaign, afai can see, wooded quadrants are very slow to traverse for armored (or worse, 4 wheeled, 2WD vehicles) units. If you want them to be easy to traverse, then there will be a road (dirt at least).
Hunter
-
Indeed the maps will be 2K x 2K. JasonC's points about playability are noted. It does make each encounter quite 'epic', but also leaves room for maneuver.
Why should each battle be 'linear', with only a small battlefield, edges that secure the flanks, and only one way to attack?
In any case, it is too late to change it, so lobbying efforts might be re-directed
Hunter
-
Not a problem, we are still going. Nothing to worry about, move along...
Hunter
-
Artillery currently is only usable 'on board' in battles.Bridges and rail lines cannot be destroyed or damaged at the operational / campaign level. Air strikes and/or Arty fire missions apparently cannot be used to degrade the road net EXCEPT in a CM tactical battle.
I'm concerned about this. Seems to me that cutting of a unit from supply by interdicting their route by indirect fire should be part of an campaign/operation. No? Might make for some interesting classic cavalry style maneuver, and while fun, perhaps not completely historically accurate.
What sort of arty fire missions are part of the campaign level? Counter mobility, Interdiction, Area denial? Please explain.
Also, I'm not clear about your answers to Bannon and Bigduke regarding repair. If I am reading this right you've answered this question two different ways. Can you clarify? [/QB]
We don't currently do repair, since we don't currently do 'damage' (as far as rail networks are concerned).
Important Announcement
in Combat Mission Campaigns
Posted
Whole Program (with a few exceptions - small amount of Delphi)