markshot

This was the major impediment I had with GTOS and still concerns me with GTMF:

You do go back, way back! Yes, Falcon3, Flanker, and the Spit9 all had guides and/or online students/classes. Got to the top of the Compuserve Falcon3 ladder in '94. Remember modems and a time before the Internet? I even remember PONG, the first mass computer game.

LanL, An interesting list. Pity that many of the links are broken. COGNOS? My first professional position was a racket arrange by one of my school professors (department head). We had to do an internship program, but he siphoned off the best students to his personal company. But getting paid, getting an A+ without submitting anything, and being 30 minutes from school was worthwhile. My first professional offer after school (CUNY-BC) ... one of three was COGNOS in the early 80's. However, I choose to do systems programming work on Wall St. instead. I have bookmarked your site. Thanks.

I have generally hated TBS games with a passion. I only ended up with FOG2 (didn't even know it existed), since it was bundled with FOGE. I am a former member of AGEOD and friends with the primary developer. But after I purchased FOG2, I fell in love with it. First, although it is TBS it is far richer than any of the uber TW mods (RTW1/RS3, RTW1/EB1, MTW2/EB2, RTW2/DEI). Second, it can be configured to be one very fast moving TBS game due to a superb UI design. Yes, I have FOGE, because I worked with Philippe Malacher and Philippe Thibaut, since they released Birth of America around 2005 or so. I love AJE and I plan to later play both ACW titles. FOGE has quite a bit that makes it unique. You win by culture vs decadence and not painting the map. It may turn out to be the first grand strategy game where the snowball affect is negated. In TW, they try to negate it by having everyone turn on you by mid-game. It is neither TW nor Paradox. FOGE introduces that nations progress through life cycles. This isn't totally new. Philippe Thibaut introduced this maybe 20 years ago in Great Invasions (set post collapse of the Western Roman Empire). But FOGE fleshes it out much better. Also, FOGE as grand strategy, is not TBS, but WEGO. Another thing fairly unique about FOGE is that buildings aren't just a tech tree, they are part of a whole sophisticated trading dynamic. You probably know you can auto-resolve battles like the old AGE engine (this is built on Slitherine's Archon) or export to FOGE. Another thing which is special is that many factions are truly unique; not just graphically unique (like TW and Paradox out of the box). Pocus has a reputation of patching to perfection. The first ACW game has something like 16 patches. About the only thing that I am not excited about is warfare. A turn is a year with every 4th year being like Winter, because the game is 500 turns. I enjoy AJE where a turn is one month. Playing the civil war between Caesar and Pompeus one must consider economy, revolts, cut grain shipments to Italy, army supply/size, weather, and the campaigning season. Great fun. I hope that helps.

I have CMBN/CMFI/CMRT/CMFB and mission packs. For the moment, I have just two combat interests. The ancient world (like Alea Jacta Est and FOG2 ... and some heavily modded TW (for the Roman period) and WWII (probably CM and MIUS).

Thanks.

I tried renaming my V3 directories, but it wanted me to activate and I did not want to screw up my account. So, I don't know if the problem was there as well. I will go do the tutorials in the other games instead.

Landser, That was my fear looking at how long the games have been out and the relatively limited third party content. Yes, QB maps do have basic plans, but given the hundreds that there are and variability under which they are used, there is no way they can rival the packaged hand crafted scenarios. I know for those who are CM grogs; only PBEM counts. (yet I just don't) I have reached the age where I will happily invested 1 year in learning everything about CM, but I will be very unhappy if after another year I am out of content. Neither BFC or third parties or putting out content that fast for someone who is retired and takes CM to be their main hobby. The game and what it simulates looks fantastic, but I want to still be playing in 2021. One of my hopes is that the large and huge scenarios will be amenable to almost a campaign style approach where you can approach them with multiple solutions.

Training campaign does not have two mortars or ammo carriers. I am checking now (reloading V3) to see if they were also missing.

Yes. That was pretty slapstick. Thanks.

No. I mainly was requesting links of interest. You need to go back and read the original post. (There is another post on this board with all types WWII training materials. Simply because someone asked.) If you paint, then comparative painting is an interesting topic. If you engineer bridges, then comparative bridge engineering is an interesting topic. If you are a software engineer who plays games, then comparative game design is an interesting topic. Neither of the games discussed are tic-tac-toe, they amount to small scale systems. I think they represent many interesting decisions as I alluded to Steve's discuss of the core engine concept differences behind CMx1 and CMx2. Sometimes, people just need to lighten up and realize that systems design and games are an art form. And learn how to appreciate art and its intrinsic beauty. The title reflected the sad nature of gamers being unable to do that.

Pelican, Given what I have seen from playing GTOS and watching GTMF on YouTube, I think you have covered the issues well. I remember when I first played GTOS. I had the style all wrong, positioning each unit and gun while painstakingly check LOS. (Because I was playing CMx1/2 from inside GTOS.) But later it did dawn on me that it is a broad strokes game. One YouTube video I was watching made a good point ... campaigns are not won or lost in tactical battles, but on the campaign map. I heard that they added WEGO to the campaign options. I do remember getting myself out of a pickle a few times by the sequence I resolved battles in GTOS. Not anymore ... I love the CM movies. They are very immersive. And they allow immersion, since you aren't failing to command while enjoying them. Also, one could argue that you need a more solid system with CM-WEGO than GTMF-RTS, because one can analyze the next minute's orders for 30 minutes. Although you can pause GTOS/GTMF, you really aren't going to analyze for 30 minutes before revising orders. I am not sure how I feel about tanks bounding ahead of the infantry. It seems from watching the game, shaped charge propelled anti-tank weapons had yet to arrive on the scene. So, with great sacrifice and bravery, you might knock off a track. Even then, if you held the field, the tank would be recovered and put back into service.

I previously raised the issue of replayability (scripted scenarios and QB). I own GTOS and GTMF, but have only dabbled. I really have played and do know CMx1 and CMx2. Part of my GT problems was simply in the early days for complete and clear help you needed to speak Russian. However, I do not believe that is true for Mius. I don't want to start a contentious debate here. Rather I wanted to request links to some well considered threads that compare and contrast the games/systems in a thoughtful and analytic way. I am tired of google searches that turn up heated threads that look like "politics" as opposed to careful analysis. So, if anyone has some good articles or discussions, I would be happy to read them. I am a connoisseur of games and software. I like to read what goes on inside game engines and the assumptions that developers made. There was a brilliant discussion by Steve (I believe here a few years back) that CMx1 was an effects based simulation where as CMx1 is an object/mechanism simulation. The advantages and disadvantages of both approaches were discussed with BFC selecting for CMx2 based on advances in computing power leading to higher real world fidelity. So, please don't flame my question. Software is my thing ... I am not married to any company or game or system. Thanks.

I did get many years out of CMx1. Although I didn't PBEM, given my age and 6,000 scenarios ... by the time, I recycled those scenarios, I had well forgotten where ATGs and tigers and other key assets were located. Sometimes senescence can be just as powerful a tool as dynamic AI.

My background is systems although my exposure to AI is more rule based/heuristics and narrow AI like chess engines ... not neural nets. We are in an era where games like CM can be learned and played at better than human levels by the most powerful neural nets (like Googles LC0). But given Moore's law ... in 10-15 years, your phone will be able to PBEM you to total defeat. Although I don't really want to build what is supposed to be a quick surprise game for me, I do appreciate that a human can see in 30 minutes, what weeks of programming fails to find. (But, of course, like traditional chess engine programming has gone on for 30 years. Last year Google's LC0 neural net beat the best programmed engine in the world with 8 hours of practice against itself.) I will definitely try QB after going through the stock scenarios/campaigns. I had not considered that it was the improvement in QBs that reduced the number of 3rd party scenarios.

Actually, I tried them out. But in the end came to that conclusion. Elsewhere, it was said that the beauty of CM is the WEGO/Movie. I usually play with many things on. But often watch the movies with much turned off. As I have programmable game controls, I flip this with one key stroke. I think being able to see into trees is more important in RT games where you don't have the above luxury.

Yes, I found (google) a lot of criticism of the QB. I just went in to the editor to take a look. They are filtered and they do have at least an AI plan which may not be more than an axis of advance and identification of good terrain.

No. I found mods for each game: CMBN_Translucent_Trees_2_0.zip CMFB_TranslucentTrees5-10-Close-Far.7z Rocket_Man-CMFI-Translucent_Trees_Mod_V1.0.brz.zip Tanks_a_Lot_s_semi-transparent_trees_for_CMRT_V2.rar

I have all 4 games. I am curious just how replayable the scenarios and campaigns are? As the original CMx1 had something like 6,000 user created scenarios (many of them vs AI). I notice that there are hundreds and hundreds of QB maps supporting AI play. How is such play. CMx1 QBs against the AI was kind of pointless. Is CMx2 better? (Yes, I know PBEM. But I don't PBEM.) Thanks!

Thank you. I found them.

(Sorry, I just rejoined the player community after a few years away.) I found the translucent tree mod for CMBN, but was unable to find one for the other games. Will it work for all four? Are there game specific versions (v4) which I need? Translucent Trees 2.0 By Rambler Thanks.

I go all the way back to the CMBO days. I have spent a few years in the ancient world, but am missing the sound of an HMG 42. I just created the following ticket. Perhaps some good soul will give me some guidance. Thanks.

The problem is that with computer monitors as the screen area goes up so does the resolution; meaning the text gets even smaller. Now 1080p (Full HD) for TV's is always 1080 x 1920. Whether that is a 20" TV or 80" TV. Your pixels and text just get bigger. I have two displays. A 21" 1600x1200 NEC Monitor and a 32" 1080p SONY TV. The TV is great for games with small text. But some older games that only support 4:3 or have scalable text, I play on the 21" like shooting pool; somewhat crisper image.

I think in other games, proximity from danger also has an impact on fatigue recovery even if they are not actively engaged. I mean hard to rest when you fear a grenade is going to be lobbed into your foxhole any minute.

Thank you for the thoughts and interesting visualization. Also, I think the idea is useful that a squad has a task whether split or not is a good organizing principle. One problem I have is that to keep recon teams in command often requires having the command unit trailing them closer than I would like. It seems to make them vulnerable to getting sucked into an ambush?