Scipio

Sorry, to make this clear: the AI is a fairly capable opponent to you, while a human opponent is not, or at least to the degree as the AI? Have you ever spoken with your doctor about this problem? If you are standing for the majority of players, then mankind is doomed.

I don't. I have checked again, with ambient sound turned off. Nothing to hear before the *sssst-boom*. </font>

It's hard for me to believe that a majority of people purchase CM and play the game so extensive and over such a long time that it makes Steve saying 'Most games are played vs the AI', and that the same masses are absolutly not interested into clubs, forums, mods or any other kind of online activity or appearance. If those masses doesn't show up somewhere, how can someone know if they are still playing the game? From my own experience, to play vs the AI is nice when you have purchased a new game. But after some time it just gets boring. I surely would never consider to play CM for nearly 5 years now vs the AI. I can't believe that someone else does. Sounds like being married with a rubber doll.

I wonder were are all the solo players asking for improvments on the AI, if they are so many. I do see a lot of people poping up to post for the first time as well as the players from the first hour, sharping knifes and collecting tar and feathers, just because Steve has said 'maybe we have to cut out the PBEM feature', while no one seems to be interested into an AI that's able to lead an attack. Not here, and not in other forums. The unique we-go system avoids cheating. Who needs a system that avoids cheating, if he's playing vs a machine?

I don't. I have checked again, with ambient sound turned off. Nothing to hear before the *sssst-boom*.

Already in CMX1, if you listen for it. </font>

Speaking of sound, speed of sound would be nice, but I guess we need to be able to switch between realistc and light speed. I second that. Would be BTW also nice if you can hear the Off-Map artillery fireing from some distance, too

Maybe you should read the threat that you've kindly linked as 'Because' above: Well, I don't know how BFC figures out if CM is played more solo then PBEM. I nearly never play vs the AI. To win or lose vs a machine is just pointless for me. But well, I guess they know what they are talking about. But I don't think that online live matches will ever take the lead over PBEM, except the whole system will be changed into a RT game with battles no longer then 30 minutes, speaking of real time, not in-game-time. Combat Mission: Total War

1 - 5³) Keep the PBEM feature 5³+1) Keep the we-go-system Wishlist: 1) Movement orders with waypoints for groups 2) I'm missing a sneak order that doesn't result in crouching. 3) Dynamic weather effects, weather changing during the battle, weather that varies from one edge of the map to the other (at least on large maps). 4) A realistic artillery system with realistic artillery effects. There is a threat running about this. 5) Let me have a beautiful landscape. Gras and flowers rolling in the wind, water wistheling a melody in brooks, sweet villages with friendly, happy people and dogs and cats and cows and horses. Let me bring death and destruction over this girly bull****. I don't want: I want 5a : Soldiers of Fortune Mode - Can we please turn on gutts, gore, exploding heads and bellys, scattered limbs and burning people running around, with realistc sound effects? War is hell! [ August 30, 2005, 08:51 AM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

What about the weather? Will the weather be more dynamic as it is now?

No, sounds like 'I need a new PC'... I wonder what is in the pipeline for grass...

I see. Well, you can digitalise a movie by scanning each single image and save it to disk in an uncompressed file format, meaning you will have some Exabyte of data. You save the same movie in MPEG-2 on a DVD. Of course you have some loss of detail - but watching DVDs is still great, isn't it? Fact is, the movie files are the real big files. Of course, there will be much more details in the new engine, but how much info about each single unit must be avaiable during the 'action phase' as it is now? That's what we finally talking about, right? I mean, how often do someone really have a look on each of his units to see if and how the moral does change during the battle, just as example? Of course, there will someone pop up and cry, but seriously, this wouldn't keep somebody away from playing the game. But I guess it would keep a lot of people away if the PBEM feature should be cut out. I'm not sure if I would play to the same extend as I do now if I can only play by Internet (I never play the AI). The problem here is just, I don't have very often the time to play a full battle over some hours. I have two jobs. I'm already happy when I can keep my 5 or 6 PBEM games going each day. But if I miss to answer a turn for one or two days, it's not a problem. If I can not play PBEM anymore, I can not keep on playing at all. Well, maybe that's just my personal problem. But I have heard about people with families, or friends, or other real life stuff... [ August 28, 2005, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Seems you've never seen an image of Charles, have you? http://www.battlefront.com/aboutus.html

Everyone here seems to believe that PBEM files MUST be bigger in CM2 then in CM1. Why?

Since I bet my ass that the first game will be a WWII US vs German type of game, I demand a conversion of the original Chance Encounter scenario. Except 'they' fear that everyone will say 'well, the original games was better' .

My guess is a WWII game. Yes, BFC has spend 9 years with it, and they are tired of it. But they are completly familiar with it, too, so it wouldn't make sense to make a lot of studies for something completly different when they have a lot of work with the new engine already. It will not be the Pacific, since tanks are not really important here, and I bet my arse that BFC want to show us fancy tank battles in the first release. I also believe that US troops will be involved, for a simple marketing reason: just to attract the US customers. Seriously, who would be interested into the film 'Saving Private Ivan' except a few grogs? Next point, I think it will be something that enables them to release a module, just to show us the possibilities of this new feature within time. Another point: it will be a very popular and well known battlefield. And finally, there must be something completly new, something that a lot of the old CM folks praid for, that just looks really cool in the magazines/screenshots/demos and can attract new customers, too. Something like a beach landing for example plus Paratroopers falling from the sky. So let me see: Kursk offers a lot of tank battles, including the Tiger and early Panthers, but no US troops. Bulge would be a candidate, but I just have no idea what kind of module should be added here, and a Winter setting is not the best thing to start with. Sicilly covers most of the points above, so it's a possible candidate - but Normandy covers them all. So I would be surprised if it's something different.

Point taken, I havn't seen it that way yet. Well, it was just an idea, and not an important one. You are allowed to continue with the current system . Much more important for me is my "CM2 Battle of Verdun" game!

Point taken, I havn't seen it that way yet. Well, it was just an idea, and not an important one. You are allowed to continue with the current system . Much more important for me is my "CM2 Battle of Verdun" game!

Yep, hacking would be a problem, but I guess you misunderstood me - I didn't meant to use a plain txt files format for PBEM files, but for scenarios files like maps. Once a game has started, there shouldn't be a problem to include all scenario information in the PBEM file and encrypt them as usual = the way it's been done now. 20 MG42 Hamstertruppen or any other squad will be of course still hardcoded. But maybe, a third party editor (for example) would do better, or at least better for some people? My idea is just, must BFC claim to program the best or only possible editor?

Yep, hacking would be a problem, but I guess you misunderstood me - I didn't meant to use a plain txt files format for PBEM files, but for scenarios files like maps. Once a game has started, there shouldn't be a problem to include all scenario information in the PBEM file and encrypt them as usual = the way it's been done now. 20 MG42 Hamstertruppen or any other squad will be of course still hardcoded. But maybe, a third party editor (for example) would do better, or at least better for some people? My idea is just, must BFC claim to program the best or only possible editor?

A good point. If, for example, a map-file would use some simple text based coding, a Non-BFC programmer should be able to write a random map generator. Same for OOB etc. I have never understood why the scenario files are encrypted.

A good point. If, for example, a map-file would use some simple text based coding, a Non-BFC programmer should be able to write a random map generator. Same for OOB etc. I have never understood why the scenario files are encrypted.

That's another point for "the new style". There's so much input from the community. I have seen a lot of good ideas during all the years. I guess much more of it could be realized when the game is in some kind of ongoing development. I hope at some point we need to redefine the word 'mod' as we use now in CM1x...

That's another point for "the new style". There's so much input from the community. I have seen a lot of good ideas during all the years. I guess much more of it could be realized when the game is in some kind of ongoing development. I hope at some point we need to redefine the word 'mod' as we use now in CM1x...

Let me sum up what we know for sure about CM2x: a) It will be a wargame It will be turn based, not RTS c) It will use 3D graphics d) It will use the 'we go' system e) We have to pay money for it Sounds all fine to me, I can't wait for the demo. For the long term game fun, I would prefer a random (quick) battle generator as we have it in CM1x. How often can you play the same (2,3) dozen of scenarios until they get boring? That's also a marketing strategy/question to keep a game alive. The only negative thing I see is this: since I prefer to play PBEM, I guess it will be a pain in the arse to list up if my opponent uses all the games/modules we need (including all updates) to start a match.