sfhand

So, I guess they could post something along the lines of "There has been some unforeseen problems with the game's development so we missed our estimated ship date.These problems also affect the demo. We are currently unsure when the game/demo will be ready". Would that really enlighten you more than your powers of observation?

"Combat Mission Shock Force 2 is in the final stages of development, however it is not yet ready for release. At this point in time we are inviting people to preorder one of several CMSF2 options at $5 off normal prices. With the purchase you will receive a license key and download link that will be activated when the game is ready. You may also add a DVD and/or Game Engine Manual to your preorder at extra cost. Please note the manual in this case is the standard Game Engine 4 manual, not a CMSF2 specific manual. Therefore, if you already have a Game Engine 4 manual from another CM product you really don't need another one. IMPORTANT NOTE!!!! As soon as CMSF2 is released we will add new purchase options for Upgrades and stand alone Modules. Owners of original Shock Force products should wait until these options are available in order to take advantage of significant savings and additional purchase flexibility." The above is from the order page in the store. Anyone doing due diligence who preordered accepted a discounted price and knew the game wasn't ready to be released at the time of purchase. Furthermore, every "release date" posted in the forums has come with a disclaimer about its accuracy. BF has in no way violated the terms of the sales agreement.

As long as Steve hasn't used the word "soon" we should be good...

I find the two year thing much more disconcerting than BF lack of communications about release dates that were given with disclaimers about their accuracy.

Apology? For what? How one deals with ones own internal circumstances is outside the purview of others, in other words, ones frustration is the result of ones expectations, especially in this instance when Steve was quite clear about shipping dates.

As one who is not currently playing CM (all games still on my machines), I still stop by to see what's happening, so it has been very gratifying to see the information about upcoming releases. "When it's done" has always worked for me as a release date but that doesn't offset my desire for information about the development of releases. So thanks to Steve for the recent information and thanks to all the developers and the betas for this truly remarkable family of games. Now, about CM3...

Ian, I hope you are doing well. Thanks for the AAR.

A link for those concerned about the patch. I think of this every time Steve says something is going to be released "soon"

VILLANOVA

Steve addressed Phil's departure a while back. IIRC, he said Phil received a "dream job" offer and left with everyone at BF wishing him well. I was fortunate to meet both Phil and Chris at the CMBN bay area preview. I can see why BF wanted them in the fold as both were exceptionally passionate and knowledgeable about CM. Happy Trails to both, I hope they are doing well wherever they are these days.

64-bit windows exe... oom issues derailed my plans for a long campaign(CM1 style) on a huge map.

So... Windows big bundle results, only CMFB is working for me. CMBN and CMBS both have the red box in the game startup screen. CMRT activate new product app is failing. Order number 00310333

Bil, thanks for yet another AAR. So far it is, as always, very insightful and very entertaining.

I'm a little late to this party... you are doing a very good job so far (I'm referring to your screenshots and descriptions, since I'm looking at both threads you won't get more than that for now). Considering Bil's track record in these affairs I tip my hat to your willingness to lie on the alter. Thanks Ian I hope you pull this one off.

Okay, the project been shelved due to OOM error. I am writing to see if anyone with a Mac (CM for Mac is a native 64 bit program) would be interested in trying to load one turn file. c3k, IanL, Baneman, and I all have Windows machines (CM for Windows is a 32 bit program). We all believe we are getting the OOM error due to limitations of the Windows version so it would be nice to test the one turn on a Mac to see if we have reached a limitation or stumbled upon a "bug". So, if you own a Mac with 8gb of RAM or more and are willing to try to load one turn please send me a pm and I'll send you the turn.

A project update: So far I've got 3 games going. I am the defending Germans vs c3k and IanL and I am the attacking Allies vs Baneman. At various times we have all had to take breaks. A 4 hour battle would take ~240 turns per player which is ~ 8 months at one turn a day. In one game we are past the 2nd reinforcement wave, in one we are past the first, and in one we are still working our way through the opening phases of the battle. Kudos to these 3 chaps for the willingness to sign up for an extended pbem tour of duty (although I think there are dedicated pbem'ers who would salivate at the idea of an ongoing battle of this nature). There have been a couple of issues brought to light as the result of the scenario, I consider them engine limitations rather than bugs, but I do not know this as fact. They are: One must restart the game after loading and playing a turn prior to attempting to load another turn, e.g., I get a turn from 2 opponents, I load one and play it, I must restart CMBN to be able to play the other turn otherwise the game crashes. One must limit unit waypoints (currently using 8 as a max) or at some point unit movement grinds to a halt (units only moving a fraction of the turn or not at all). While I think the map could use some polish (I tried to keep aspects of it sparse for better performance), at a little over a third of the way through I think things are going well all things considered. I'm bumping this in case there are others who might enjoy the ordeal.

As others have mentioned, CMBN is an improvement over CMBO in too many ways to list. Therefore, my unique contribution to the thread will be to suggest you play the demo!

I'm currently testing a battle on an 8x2 km map. In the force deployment 3D preview in the editor, on a machine with only 4GB ram (remember the x64 OS is using ~1GB), it crashed until I enlarged the swap file. After enlarging the swapfile it can run but is too choppy to deploy forces. So, in short, before any battle calculations were taking place it was using more than 3 GB but less than 4 GB. Add to that flying lead coupled with the proposed enhancement of the AI and future engine enhancements and you might see how one could be concerned about needing more memory. It is true that so far on my 64 bit machine with 16GB there have been no problems yet. It is also a non-issue for Macs since the Mac version is already 64 bit.

They are all worthy ideas, IMHO, however, I'd rather pay for a 64bit Windows release with multicore support.

Wow, thanks for that link... impressive!

As usual, I am late to the party, Thanks Mark!

The idea of the scenario is to simulate a CMx1 style Operation. This is done by fighting all the battles on a very large map which offers a persistent environment. In this battle the Allied player has a series of phase lines that are labeled "do not cross before (time)". The first battle's phase line is just on the north side of the bridge with "do not cross before 11:45" instructions. In this video Ken (c3k) has crossed between 11:47 and 11:48. Well done! The next one should be more difficult

Okay, being within 6-7 minutes of the first reinforcement wave with c3k, with me playing Axis and c3k having played Axis earlier and knowing the Axis force composition, I think the Allied player should be given a heads up about the force they are up against. While I am not claiming a victory I feel good about the chances of my reinforcements arriving and supporting my position on the north bank before they are destroyed. I don't believe having an idea of the Axis force capabilities will make the Allied player throw caution to the wind, at least not initially: the Axis AT guns make the open spaces dangerous as does the air support, and, the Axis also have a lot of infantry based AT assets that make the wooded areas dangerous. But, if the Allied player is able to locate and destroy the AT guns they will be better positioned to take on the remaining Axis forces in the limited time available prior to the first reinforcement wave. Of course we are still a long way off in both of our games, so I am not predicting any outcomes there either. I just wanted to revisit the subject and keep it in the forefront of our minds as we play through this first battle.